Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 22569 Mad
Judgement Date : 17 November, 2021
Crl.O.P. No.6785 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.11.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
Crl.O.P.No.6785 of 2017
and Crl.M.P.Nos.4964 & 4965 of 2017
R.Ramakrishnan ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State
Rep. by The Inspector of Police
Dharapuram Police Station,
Tirupur District.
2.S.Balamani ...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal
Procedure Code, to call for the records in C.C.No.257 of 2015 on the file of the
Judicial Magistrate Court at Dharapuram and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Myilsamy
For Respondents : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar
Government Advocate for R1
R2-No appearance
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the charge sheet
filed under Sections 294(b), 323, 506(ii) of IPC r/w Section 4 of Tamil Nadu
Prohibition of Harassment of women Act, 1998.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P. No.6785 of 2017
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for
the first respondent. There is no appearance on behalf of the second respondent.
3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that
there is no materials unearthed during the investigation to attract any of the
offences against the present petitioner. It is his further contention that the
present petitioner was not at all present at the time of alleged scene of
occurrence and he has been unnecessarily arrayed as an accused. The entire
materials found in the FIR and final report indicate that A4 allegedly caused
hurt on the witness one Balamani and caused simple injuries is vague and
uncertain. Therefore his contention is that there is no material of evidence
available on record cannot be considered at this stage.
4. In view of the above, this Court is of the prima facie view that the
allegation against the petitioner herein that he was present at the time of
occurrence or not cannot be gone into under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., and it is left
open to the petitioner to establish his stand before the trial Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P. No.6785 of 2017
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court to dispense
with the presence of the petitioner. Taking into consideration, the facts and
circumstances of the case, the presence of the petitioner is dispensed with and
he shall be represented by a counsel, who shall cross examine the witnesses on
the same day, they are examined in Chief. The petitioner 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 judgment.
6. In such a view of the matter, this Court is of the view that quashing
of the case cannot be considered, at this point of time. Accordingly, this
Criminal Original Petition is dismissed with a direction to the Court below to
complete the proceedings in C.C.No.257 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate Court at Dharapuram as expeditiously as possible. Consequently
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
17.11.2021 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No msv
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P. No.6785 of 2017
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J
msv
Crl.O.P.No.6785 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.Nos.4964 & 4965 of 2017
17.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!