Madras High Court

Rajapandi @ Rajapandiyan vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 4 April, 2022

                                                                            Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6034 of 2022


                         BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                             DATED: 04.04.2022

                                                   CORAM:

                           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

                                       Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6034 of 2022
                                                   and
                                  Crl.M.P(MD) Nos.4208 and 4209 of 2022


                1.Rajapandi @ Rajapandiyan
                2.Karthi @ Karthikeyan                                         ...Petitioners

                                                         Vs.


                1. The Sub Inspector of Police,
                   Musiri Police Station,
                   Musiri,
                   Trichy.

                2. Suresh                                                      ...Respondents


                PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying

                this Court to call for the charge sheet filed in PRC No. 26/2021 on the file of

                the Judicial Magistrate court, Musiri and quash the charge sheet filed by the

                1st respondent against the petitioners in Cr.No. 96/2021.




                1/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                               Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6034 of 2022


                                      For Petitioners    : Mr.S.Muthukrishnan

                                      For R1             : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi
                                                           Additional Public Prosecutor

                                                        ORDER

This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in PRC No.

26/2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate court, Musiri, thereby

taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 294(b), 307, 506(i), 353,

and 427 of IPC and Section 3 of Tamil Nadu Medicare Service Persons and

Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage or Loss to

the Property) Act, 2008 in Crime No.96/2021, as against the petitioners.

2.The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the

petitioners used filthy languages against one Baskar and the second

respondent and also damaged the second respondent's cell phone. Therefore,

the second respondent lodged a complaint and based on the statement of the

second respondent, the first respondent registered a FIR in Crime No.294(b),

323, 307 and 506(i) of IPC and Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu Public Property

(Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992.

3.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6034 of 2022

the petitioners are innocent and he had not committed any offence as alleged

by the prosecution. Without any base, the first respondent police registered a

case in Crime No. 96/2021 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 307,

and 506(ii) of IPC and Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu Public Property

(Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 , as against the petitioners and

the same has been taken cognizance in PRC No. 26/2021 on the file of the

learned Judicial Magistrate court, Musiri. Hence he prayed to quash the same.

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the trial

has been commenced and some of the witnesses have been examined in this

case.

5.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6.It is relevant to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court

of India passed in Crl.A.No.579 of 2019 dated 02.04.2019 in the case of

Devendra Prasad Singh Vs. State of Bihar & Anr., as follows:-

" 12.So far as the second ground is concerned, we are of the view that the High Court

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6034 of 2022

while hearing the application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. had no jurisdiction to appreciate the statement of the witnesses and record a finding that there were inconsistencies in their statements and, therefore, there was no prima facie case made out against respondent No.2. In our view, this could be done only in the trial while deciding the issues on the merits or/and by the Appellate Court while deciding the appeal arising out of the final order passed by the Trial Court but not in Section 482 Cr.P.C. proceedings.

13.In view of the foregoing discussion, we allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order and restore the aforementioned complaint case to its original file for being proceeded with on merits in accordance with law.

7.Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dealing in respect of

the very same issue in Crl.A.No.1572 of 2019 dated 17.10.2019 in the case of

Central Bureau of Invstigation Vs. Arvind Khanna, wherein, it has been

held as follows:

“19. After perusing the impugned order and on hearing the submissions made by the learned

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6034 of 2022

senior counsels on both sides, we are of the view that the impugned order passed by the High Court is not sustainable. In a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the High Court has recorded findings on several disputed facts and allowed the petition. Defence of the accused is to be tested after appreciating the evidence during trial. The very fact that the High Court, in this case, went into the most minute details, on the allegations made by the appellant-C.B.I., and the defence put-forth by the respondent, led us to a conclusion that the High Court has exceeded its power, while exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

20.In our view, the assessment made by the High Court at this stage, when the matter has been taken cognizance by the Competent Court, is completely incorrect and uncalled for.”

8.Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India also held in the order

dated 02.12.2019 in Crl.A.No.1817 of 2019 in the case of M.Jayanthi Vs.

K.R.Meenakshi & anr, as follows:

"9. It is too late in the day to seek reference to any authority for the proposition that while invoking the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing a

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6034 of 2022

complaint or a charge, the Court should not embark upon an enquiry into the validity of the evidence available. All that the Court should see is as to whether there are allegations in the complaint which form the basis for the ingredients that constitute certain offences complained of. The Court may also be entitled to see (i) whether the preconditions requisite for taking cognizance have been complied with or not; and (ii) whether the allegations contained in the complaint, even if accepted in entirety, would not constitute the offence alleged.

..............

13. A look at the complaint filed by the appellant would show that the appellant had incorporated the ingredients necessary for prosecuting the respondents for the offences alleged. The question whether the appellant will be able to prove the allegations in a manner known to law would arise only at a later stage...................."

The above judgments are squarely applicable to this case and as such, the

points raised by the petitioner cannot be considered by this Court under

Section 482 Cr.P.C.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6034 of 2022

9.In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to quash

the proceedings in PRC No. 26/2021 on the file of the learned Judicial

Magistrate court, Musiri. The petitioners are at liberty to raise all the grounds

before the trial Court. Considering the age of the petitioners, the personal

appearance of the petitioners are dispensed with and he shall be represented

by a counsel after filing appropriate application. However, the petitioners

shall be present before the Court at the time of furnishing of copies, framing

charges, questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and at the time of passing