Madras High Court
Kalyana Rao vs State Rep. By on 18 January, 2021
Crl. OP No.370 of 2021
and Crl. MP Nos.177 & 179 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.01.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
Crl. OP No.370 of 2021
and Crl. MP Nos.177 & 179 of 2021
1. Kalyana Rao
2. Asok Kumar
3. Manoj Kumar ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3
vs.
1. State Rep. By
The Sub Inspector of Police,
Thiruthani Police Station,
Thiruthani – Post,
Thiruvallur District. ... Respondent/Complainant
2. Andra Banu ... Respondent/Defacto Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in Charge Sheet in C.C.No.8 of
2020 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Tiruttani, Thiruvallur – District
in pursuance of Crime No.84 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent and
quash the same.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl. OP No.370 of 2021
and Crl. MP Nos.177 & 179 of 2021
For Petitioner : Mr. D.Veerasekharan
For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz
Additional Public Prosecutor
for R1
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.
No.8 of 2020 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Tiruttani,
Thiruvallur District.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners brought to the notice of this
Court the Registered Will dated 24.10.2013 executed by the husband of the
Defacto Complainant in favour of the first petitioner and submitted that the
second respondent has absolutely no right over the property and the entire
case is false and it is attended with mala fides. The learned counsel further
submitted that it will be an abuse of process, if the Criminal proceedings are
permitted to be continued before the Court below.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl. OP No.370 of 2021
and Crl. MP Nos.177 & 179 of 2021
3. In the considered view of this Court, the document relied upon by
the learned counsel for the petitioners cannot be taken into consideration by
this Court, since it is a defence material and the same cannot be relied upon
by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure. The law on this issue is well settled. Useful
reference can be made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
State of Orissa Vs. Debendra Nath Padhi, reported in 2005 (1) CTC 134
and in Ravindra Kumar Madhanlal Goenka and another Vs. Rugmini
Ram Raghav Spinners Pvt Ltd., reported in 2010 (3) SCC Crl 1011.
4. The grounds that have been raised by the learned counsel for the
petitioners is purely factual in nature and this Court cannot go into the same
in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. It is left open to
the petitioners to raise these grounds before the Court below and the Court
below shall consider the same on its own merits and in accordance with
law.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl. OP No.370 of 2021
and Crl. MP Nos.177 & 179 of 2021
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners requested this Court to
dispense with the appearance of the petitioners and to permit them to be
represented by a counsel. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances of the case, the appearance of the first and third petitioners,
who are arrayed as A1 and A3, is dispensed with and they shall be
represented by a counsel who shall cross examine the witnesses on the same
day, they are examined in Chief. These petitioners shall be present before
the Court below at the time of questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C and at
the time of passing of the final judgement.
6. This Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with a direction to
the Court below to complete the proceedings, within a period of three
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The trial shall be
conducted on a day to day basis in accordance with the guidelines given by
Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in Vinod Kumar Vs State of Punjab [2015
(1) MLJ (Crl) 288 SC]. If the petitioners adopts any dilatory tactics, it is
open to the trial Court to insist upon the presence of the petitioners and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl. OP No.370 of 2021
and Crl. MP Nos.177 & 179 of 2021
remand them to custody as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. SHAMBHU NATH SINGH (JT
2001 (4) SC 3191). Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are
also closed.
18.01.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
jv
To
1. The Sub Inspector of Police,
Thiruthani Police Station,
Thiruthani – Post,
Thiruvallur District.
2. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras,
Chennai 600 104.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl. OP No.370 of 2021
and Crl. MP Nos.177 & 179 of 2021
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
Crl. OP No.370 of 2021
and Crl. MP Nos.177 & 179 of 2021
18.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
