Madras High Court
Shagul Hameed vs The State Represented By on 12 January, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.426 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 12.01.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.426 of 2022
and
Cr.M.P.(MD)Nos.324 & 326 of 2022
Shagul Hameed ... Petitioner/
Accused No.1
Vs.
1.The State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch,
Trichy District.
Crime No.14 of 2018. ... Respondent/
Complainant
2.K.Raja ... Respondent/
Defacto Complainant
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for
the charge sheet in C.C.No.42 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate
No.1, Tiruchirappalli, Crime No.14 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent
and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sudhagar Nagaraj
For Respondents : Mr.B.Thanga Aravind
Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R.1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.426 of 2022
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned
Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the first respondent.
2. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings
in C.C.No.42 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Trichy. The
case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had cheated the defacto
complainant to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only).
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner while reiterating the
contentions set out in the memorandum of grounds, would contend that the
petitioner had received only Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only). He
would also argue that the case is purely civil in nature and therefore, the
question of intiating the prosecution against the petitioner does not arise.
4. I am not persuaded by the said submissions. Since contentious facts
are involved, this Court cannot exercise its inherent powers under Section
482 Cr.P.C. Leaving open the petitioner’s contentions and defences, this
Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.426 of 2022
5.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the
personal appearance of the petitioner before the Court below shall stand
dispensed with. The Court below will insist on the personal appearance of the
petitioner only on three occasions namely, to answer the charges, examination
under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., and at the time of pronouncing Judgment. On all
other occasions, the petitioner need not appear before the Court below.
However, on those occasions, the petitioner will have to be represented by his
counsel. If the petitioner's counsel is also absent, the benefit of dispensing the
personal appearance of the petitioner will stand automatically vacated.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
12.01.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
mga
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.
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate No.1,
Tiruchirappalli.
2.The Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch,
Trichy District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.426 of 2022
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
mga
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.426 of 2022
and
Cr.M.P.(MD)Nos.324 & 326 of 2022
12.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
