Madras High Court
Murugan vs The State Represented By on 1 April, 2022
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 01.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6045 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P(MD) No.4214 of 2022
1. Murugan
2. Thilagaraj
3. Karthikrajaji
4. Mohanraj
5. Manikandan
6. Vishnu alias Vishnudoss
7. Jawahar
8. Micharaja
9. Indrajith
10. Kanagaraj
11. Mathivanan
12. Ramesh
13. Kalieshwaran alias kalirajan
14. Ananth alias Pasupathipandian
15. Karuppasamy
16. Karthick ...Petitioners
Vs.
1. The State represented by,
The Inspector of Police,
Allinagaram Police Station,
Theni District.
(Crime No.372 of 2017)
2. S.Saravana Devendaran ...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to
call for the records relating to the proceedings in STC.No.11198 of 2017 on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2
the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Theni and quash the same as against
petitioners.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy
For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi
No.1 Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings
in STC.No.11198 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Theni.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that
the facts of the case are exactly similar to the case covered in the decision
reported in 2018 2 LW (Crl) 606 [Jeevanandham and others vs. The
Inspector of Police Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur
District] dated 20.09.2018 and in the case of Sri Raja vs Inspector of
Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station Virudhunagar District and other
in batch of cases in Crl.O.P(MD) No.7922 of 2019 dated 30.08.2019
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondent would submit that the facts of the case are similar to the facts
covered under the Judgment referred above.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.
5. Perused the materials on record
6.The facts of this case is similar to the facts covered by the Judgment
of this Court reported in 2018 2 LW (Crl) 606 [Jeevanandham and
others vs. The Inspector of Police Velayuthampalayam Police
Station, Karur District] dated 20.09.2018 and in case of Sri Raja vs
Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station Virudhunagar
District and other in batch of cases in Crl.O.P(MD) No.7922 of 2019
dated 30.08.2019. Accordingly, the proceedings in STC.No.11198 of 2017
on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Theni is hereby quashed insofar as the
petitioners alone and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
01.04.2022
Internet:Yes
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non speaking order
aav
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
Allinagaram Police Station,
Theni District.
2. The Additional Public Prosecutor
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN.J.,
aav
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6045 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P(MD) No.4214 of 2022
01.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
