Madras High Court
N.Sivakumaran vs State Represented By The ... on 7 July, 2022
Crl.OP.No.4089 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.07.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
Crl.O.P. No.4089 of 2022
N.Sivakumaran ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. State represented by The Inspector of Police,
Civil Supply C.I.D., Chennai Unit,
Ambattur.
[Crime No.271 of 2014]
2. R.Manokaran,
The Assistant Commissioner,
Civil Supply Consumer Protection Department,
Villivakkam Division, Chennai – 600 084. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal
Procedure Code, to call for the records relating to the F.I.R. registered in
Crime No.271 of 2014 by the first respondent in so far as it relates to the
petitioner is concern and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.J.Muthukumaran
For Respondents : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam
Government Advocate (Crl.Side) - R1
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 6
Crl.OP.No.4089 of 2022
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking to quash the First Information
Report registered in Crime No.271 of 2014 pending investigation on the file
of the first respondent for the offence under sections 6 [2] [3] of TNSC
[RDCS] Order 1982 read with 7 [i] a [ii] of EC Act 1955.
2. Heard Mr.J.Muthukumaran, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, learned Government
Advocate for the first respondent.
4. This Court had an occasion to consider a similar issue in
Crl.O.P.No.25918 of 2018. The relevant portion of the order is extracted
hereunder:
“3. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the
notice of this Court, the earlier order passed by this Court, the
earlier order passed by this Court, under similar circumstances,
wherein this Court had quashed the FIR. 3 The relevant
portion of the order is extracted hereunder:
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.OP.No.4089 of 2022
“2.Based on an inspection conducted in the year 2010,
the petitioner herein has been arrayed as an accused for having
misappropriated a sum of Rs.21,903.85/-. Hence, FIR has been
registered against him on 20.05.2010 for offences under
Sections 6(ii) and 6(iii) of TNSC (RDCS), Order 1982 r/w.7(i)
a(ii) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 7. I am unable to
comprehend as to how the respondent police would be justified
in keeping the investigation pending for a period of more than
seven years. Apart from that, it is also seen that the petitioner
was placed under suspension, in view of the pendency of the
criminal proceedings. Furthermore, he had been anticipating
the outcome of the final report of investigation for more than
seven years. In the mean time, he also retired from his service.
The inordinate delay in completing the investigation would
have certainly caused serious prejudice to the petitioner herein.
On this sole ground the petitioner would be entitled to succeed.
8. In view of the laches on the part of the prosecution to
complete the investigation within a reasonable time, I am of the
view that no justification can be established, if the respondents
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.OP.No.4089 of 2022
herein are permitted to file a final report/charge sheet, at this
belated stage. Hence, the criminal original petition stands
allowed. The proceedings in Crime No.291 of 2010, on the file
of the Inspector of Police, Civil Supplies CID, Chennai, is
hereby quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petition is closed.” ... ... ...
6. There is absolutely no justification on the part of the
first respondent to have kept the FIR pending from the year
2012, without any progress. The petitioner has suffered enough
due to the pending FIR and he has not been permitted to retire
and all of his retirement benefits have been stalled. An
inordinate delay in completing the investigation resulted in
seriously affecting the rights of the petitioner. The judgment
that has been referred supra will squarely apply to the facts of
the present case. There is no justification in keeping this FIR
pending at this belated stage.”
5. The present case is also squarely covered by the above order. It is
almost eight years, since the FIR was registered and there is absolutely no
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.OP.No.4089 of 2022
progress in the investigation. In view of the pendency of the criminal case
against the petitioner, his services as Bill Clerk has not been regularized and
annual increments, incentive bonus etc., have not been sanctioned. The
inordinate delay in completing the investigation has resulted in seriously
affecting the rights of the petitioner. No useful purpose would be served in
keeping the FIR pending.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the First
Information Report registered in Crime No.271 of 2014 pending on the file
of the first respondent is hereby quashed.
07.07.2022
vrc
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
Civil Supply C.I.D., Chennai Unit,
Ambattur.
2. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.OP.No.4089 of 2022
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
vrc
Crl.O.P. No.4089 of 2022
07.07.2022
________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
