R.Narayanan vs The Sub Inspector Of Police
2022 Latest Caselaw 7788 Mad

                                                             1

                                   BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                   Dated:13/04/2022

                                                        CORAM:

                                        THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN

                                             Crl.OP(MD)No.18967 of 2019
                                                         and
                                       Crl.MP(MD)Nos.11126 and 11127 of 2019

                     1.R.Narayanan
                     2.R.Petchimuthu                         : Petitioners/A & A2

                                                         Vs.

                     1.The Sub Inspector of Police,
                       Seithur Police Station,
                       Virudhunagar District,
                      (Crime No.185 of 2019)      : R1/Complainant

                     2.Bose                                  : R2/De-facto Complainant


                                  Prayer: Criminal Original Petition has been filed
                     under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call
                     for the records pertaining to the case in CC No.362 of
                     2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Rajapalayam
                     and quash the same.

                                  For Petitioner         :       Mr.J.Selvam

                                  For 1st Respondent     :       Mr.P.Kottai Chamy
                                                                  Government Advocate
                                                                 (Criminal side)

                                  For 2nd Respondent     : Mr.R.Nireshkumar




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                             2

                                                         O R D E R

The petition has been filed seeking quashment of the

case in CC No.362 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial

Magistrate, Rajapalayam.

2.The case of the prosecution in brief:-

There was previous enmity with regard to dispute

between the accused and the de-facto complainant. On

09/08/2019 at about 7.30 pm, when the de-facto complaint

went to the tea shop, the accused persons abused him in

filthy language, slapped on his right ear and also

criminally intimidated him. Based upon the complaint

given by the de-facto complaint, a case in Crime No.185

of 2019 was registered for the offences punishable under

sections 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) IPC and after completing

the formalities of investigation, final report was filed

and it was taken cognizance in CC No. 363 of 2019 by the

Judicial Magistrate, Rajapalayam.

3.Seeking quashment of the same, this petition is

filed by the petitioners.

4.Heard both sides.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners

would submit that section 323 IPC may not be attracted in

the light of the allegation that has been made in the

FIR. According to him, absolutely, there is no injury

caused to the de-facto complainant. Even as per the

allegation made in the FIR, only the de-facto complainant

appears to have visited the place of the petitioners and

made quarrel. So according to him, section 334 IPC will

come into operation and the prosecution cannot be

proceeded against the petitioners.

6.In the light of the own admission that has been

made by the petitioners, whether such a contention is

accepted or not is a matter for consideration by the

trial court. Whether there was any corroboration is also

matter for consideration by the trial court. Whether

section 334 IPC is attracted to the facts and

circumstances of the case or not is also a matter for

trial. So the contention on the part of the petitioners

that no injury has caused by the petitioners in the

alleged occurrence, so no ground is also available to

proceed against the petitioners is not at all acceptable.

7.The judgments cited by the petitioners are not

made applicable to the facts and circumstances of this

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

case. When the specific allegation of causing injury has

been raised, it may not be proper on the part of this

court to quash the proceedings at the initial stage. The

learned counsel for the petitioners would rely upon the

written Article with regard to the injuries. That may not

be taken into account at this stage. So, I find no merit

in this petition and the petitioners must undergo the

trial process.

9.In the result, this criminal original petition is

dismissed. But however considering the fact that the de-

facto complainant and the petitioner are brothers and

also considering the oldness of the matter, there shall

be a direction to the Judicial Magistrate, Rajapalayam to

dispose of the case, within a period of five months from

the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After, the

compliance report must be submitted to this Registry.

Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petitions are

closed.

13/04/2022

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No er

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Note :

In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

To,

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Seithur Police Station, Virudhunagar District,

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

G.ILANGOVAN, J

er

Crl.OP(MD)No.18967 of 2019

13.04.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis