Madras High Court
K.S.Jagannathan vs Nagaraj on 22 September, 2021
Crl.R.C.No.1021 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.09.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Crl.R.C.No.1021 of 2019
and
Crl.M.P.No.14164 of 2019
K.S.Jagannathan ...petitioner
Vs
1.Nagaraj
2.P.V.Ravi
Advocate
3.Thangavathana Balakrishnan,
Advocate ...Respondents
Prayer: Criminal Revision is filed Under Section 397 and 401 of Code of
Criminal Procedure Code praying to call for the entire records in connection
with the Crl.M.P.No.3629 of 2017 in Crl.M.P.No.2672 of 2017 in
C.C.No.46 of 2008 dated 17.07.2019 on the files of the Learned Judicial
Magistrate-I, Dharmapuri and set aside the same and direct the respondents
2 and 3 to appear before the Learned Judicial Magistrate-1, Dharmapuri in
Crl.M.P.No.2672 of 2017 in C.C.No.46 of 2008 dated 17.07.2019.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Parthiban
For Respondent-2 : M/s.M.Rakhi
For Respondent-3 : M/s.M.Ezhilarasi
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1021 of 2019
ORDER
(The case has been heard through video conference)
These Criminal Revision cases have been filed against the order dated
17.07.2019 passed in Crl.M.P.No.3629 of 2017 in Crl.M.P.No.2672 of 2017
in C.C.No.46 of 2008 by the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Dharmapuri and
set aside the same and consequently, direct the respondents 2 and 3 to
appear before the Learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Dharmapuri.
2. The petitioner is the defacto complainant. Based on his complaint, a
case in Crime No.4 of 2007 was registered against the first respondent
herein and others for the offene under Section 419, 420, 120b, 468 and 471
IPC. After completing the investigation, the charge sheet was filed before
the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Dharmapuri, and the same was taken on
file in C.C.No.46 of 2008. After competition of trial and on hearing the
arguments advanced on either side, the learned Magistrate found the
accused guilty for the offences under Sections 419, 468 and 471 IPC and
convicted all the accused. Against the order of conviction and sentence, A1,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1021 of 2019
A3 and A4 filed an appeal before the Sessions Court in which, the appellate
Court acquitted all the other accused except A1/the first respondent herein
and confirmed the conviction for the offence under Section 419 IPC and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years with
fine of Rs.5000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further
period of one month. Subsequently, when the 1st respondent was arrested
and produced before the learned Magistrate based on the Non Bailable
Warrant, the 1st respondent filed a memo containing false informations
stating that he has filed an appeal, which is at SR stage before this Court
and the same is likely to be posted on 04.01.2016 and hence, the learned
Magistrate granted time for the 1st respondent/accused. Only thereafter, the
1st respondent has filed a revision before this Court along with a petition
seeking bail and bail was also granted on certain conditions.
3. Hence, the petitioner had filed a miscellaneous petition in
C.M.P.No.2672 of 2017 seeking to arrest the first respondent/A1 for not
complying the conditions imposed by this Court, while granting bail and
also for filing of the memo containing false informations. Subsequently, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1021 of 2019
petitioner had also filed a miscellaneous petition in C.M.P.No.3629 of 2017
seeking to implead the 2nd and 3rd respondents, who are Advocates and to
convict them for aiding the first respondent to file the memo containing
false informations. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri, after
considering the above petition, by order dated 17.07.2019, dismissed the
said petition, against which, the petitioner is now before this Court with the
present revision.
4. According to the petitioner, the respondents colluded with each
other and misguided the Court and later got bail. Therefore, the petition was
filed against the 1st respondent under Section 195 Cr.P.C. in
C.M.P.No.2672 of 2017 seeking to arrest the 1st respondent for filing a false
memo before the trial Court. Since, the 2nd and 3rd respondents colluded
with the 1st respondent/A1 and they also dealt along with the 1st
respondent/A1, the 2nd and 3rd respondents have to be impleaded as
respondents 2 and 3 in the above miscellaneous petition. Therefore the
petitioner also filed a miscellaneous petition before the trial Court in
C.M.P.No.3629 of 2017 seeking to implead the 2nd and 3rd respondents and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1021 of 2019
to arrest them also. The learned Magistrate, without considering the above
fact and the reason to implad the 2nd and 3rd respondents, has passed an
impugned order dismissing the petition. Therefore, the learned counsel
prays to set aside the impugned order and to allow the revision.
5. The learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent would submit that even
according to the petitioner, the 1st respondent was convicted by the trial
Court against which, the 1st respondent preferred an appeal and the
appellate Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction against
the 1st respondent/A1 for the offence under Section 419 IPC by Judgment
dated 16.10.2015. He would further submit that only on the instructions of
the 1st respondent, he had filed a Memo dated 28.12.2015 before the
Magistrate stating that a Revision Petition has been filed before this Court
and the same is at SR stage. Even otherwise, the learned Magistrate had
granted only time till 16.01.2016 by its order dated 28.12.2015 since
because the period of 90 days from the date of Judgment in Crl.A.No.19 of
2014 was not expired for filing appeal and not based on the said Memo. In
order to harass the Counsels who appeared for his opponents, the petitioner
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1021 of 2019
has filed the present petition before this Court.
6. The learned Counsel for the 3rd respondent would submit that he
was the Counsel for the 1st respondent before this Court and on the
instructions of the 1st respondent, he filed a Criminal Revision Petition
before this Court and obtained an order for suspension of sentence. Other
than that, he has no role to play in filing of the said memo with incorrect
details before the learned Judicial Magistrate.
7. Heard Mr.Parthiban, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned counsels appeared for the 2nd and 3rd respondents. Even though
notice has been served to the 1st respondent and his name is also printed in
the cause list, none appeared for the first respondent.
8. Admittedly, the 2nd respondent is the counsel appeared before the
trial Court and the 3rd respondent is the counsel in the revision filed against
the Judgment of conviction filed before this Court for the 1 st
respondent/A1. It is seen that the fact remains that the S.R. Number
mentioned in the Memo dated 28.12.2015 has been filed by the 1st
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1021 of 2019
respondent/A1 before the Magistrate with incorrect and false informations
in order to escape from the arrest
9. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the learned Judicial
Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri, in C.M.P.No.3629 of 2017 dated 17.07.2019
is hereby set aside.
10. The learned Magistrate is directed to implead the 2nd and 3rd
respondents in the C.M.P.No.2672 of 2017 and since, the same is pending
from the year 2017, the learned Magistrate is directed to dispose of the
petition in accordance with law within a period of 2 months from the date
of receipt of copy of this order .
11. With the above direction, this Criminal revision case is allowed.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
22.09.2021
ksa2/dsn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1021 of 2019
To
The Judicial Magistrate-I,
Dharmapuri.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.R.C.No.1021 of 2019
P.VELMURUGAN,J.
dsn
Crl.R.C.No. 1021 of 2019
and
Crl.M.P.No. 14164 of 2019
22.09.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
