Ashwathaman vs The State Rep.
2022 Latest Caselaw 8370 Mad

                                                                                    Crl.O.P.No.9028 of 2022

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED : 21.04.2022

                                                             CORAM

                         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

                                                 Crl.O.P.No.9028 of 2022
                                                           and
                                                 Crl.M.P.No.5263 of 2022

                      Ashwathaman                                                 ... Petitioner

                                                               Vs

                      1.The State rep., by,
                        The Inspector of Police,
                        P3, Vyasarpadi Police Station,
                        Chennai.

                      2.Bazir Ahmed                                               ... Respondents



                      Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the
                      Criminal Procedure Code, pleased to call for the records and quash the FIR
                      in Crime No.28 of 2019 dated 26.01.2019 on the file of The Inspector of
                      Police, P3, Vyasarpadi Police Station, Chennai.


                                    For Petitioner       :     Mr.M.P.Saravanan
                                    For R1               :     Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan
                                                               Additional Public Prosecutor



                      1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                      Crl.O.P.No.9028 of 2022



                                                             ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to call for the

records and quash the FIR in Crime No.28 of 2019 dated 26.01.2019 on the

file of The Inspector of Police, P3, Vyasarpadi Police Station, Chennai.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 26.01.2019, the de-facto

complainant/R2, Head Constable of the first respondent Police Station had

lodged the complaint before the first respondent stating that on 26.01.2019,

at about 5.00 pm, while he was patrolling in the police vehicle, he had seen

that the accused had encroached the SM road with 30 speakers and by

playing speakers with loud volume had disturbed the public and caused

nuisance and thereby, endangered the life and personal safety of others.

Thereby, on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case in

Crime No.28 of 2019 was registered by the first respondent for the offences

under Section 290 and 336 of IPC.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that

there was a function at the house of the petitioner and that they had not

caused nuisance to anybody and no person from the public has given any

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.9028 of 2022

complaint and the respondent initiated a Suo-moto proceeding against the

petitioner and others and registered an FIR in Crime No.28 of 2019 for the

offences under Section 290 and 336 of IPC. He would also submit that

these are the trivial offences and despite, the case is of the year 2019, the

respondent have not filed the final report. He would further submit that the

facts of the case are 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.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first

respondent would submit that the petitioner have blocked the road and

played the speakers with heavy volume and caused nuisance to the public.

He would also submit that the case has been registered based on the

complaint given by the Head Constable/R2.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the

learned Additional Public Prosecutor and perused the materials available on

record.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.9028 of 2022

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.

7. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the

allegations are also trivial in nature and no useful purpose will be served by

keeping the proceedings pending in respect of the accused.

8. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the

proceedings in Crime No.28 of 2019, pending on file of the Respondent

Police, is hereby quashed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous

petition is closed.

21.04.2022

Internet:Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order ham

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.9028 of 2022

To

1.The Inspector of Police, P3, Vyasarpadi Police Station, Chennai.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.9028 of 2022

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.J,

ham

Crl.O.P.No.9028 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.No.5263 of 2022

21.04.2022

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