Madras High Court
R.Thangaraj vs The Sub-Inspector Of Police on 29 April, 2022
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 29.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8245 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P(MD)Nos.5573 and 5574 of 2022
1.R.Thangaraj
2.R.Baskar
3.R.Ashok Kumar
4.P.Muneeswaran
5.M.Shanmugaraj
6.R.Seeniraja
7.K.Vignesh
8.R.Murugan
9.L.Kamaraj
10.K.Ramaraj
11.Thirumalaisamy
12.R.Rajendran
13.M.Ravikumar
14.M.Moorthy
15.R.Ramarajan @ Ramaraj
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2
16.R.Essakki
17.V.Chandran
18.R.Murugesan
19.M.Ramaraj
20.R.Rajan
21.S.Raja @ Rathina Raja
22.R.Saravanan
23.P.Mariyappan
24.R.Dinesh @ Dinesh Kumar ...Petitioners
Vs.
1. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Sambavarvadakarai Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
(Crime No.132 of 2015)
2. The Inspector of Police,
Achenpudur Circle,
Tirunelveli.
3.Mariappan,
Village Administrative Officer,
Sambavarvadakarai,
Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of
Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in pursuant to the proceedings
in S.T.C.No.1073 of 2017, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Sengottai and quash the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Jenifar Bibin
For Respondents : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the
proceedings in S.T.C.No.1073 of 2017, on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Sengottai.
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 Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 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 Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 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 S.T.C.No.1073 of 2017, on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Sengottai is hereby quashed insofar as the petitioners alone and the
Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed.
Index : Yes / No 29.04.2022
Internet : Yes / No
lr
To
1. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Sambavarvadakarai Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. The Inspector of Police,
Achenpudur Circle,
Tirunelveli.
3.The Village Administrative Officer,
Sambavarvadakarai,
Tirunelveli District.
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.,
lr
Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8245 of 2022
29.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
