Madras High Court

Nallamuthu vs The Inspector Of Police on 27 June, 2022

                                                                           Crl.OP.No.15069 of 2020

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 27.06.2022

                                                      CORAM:

                            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

                                               Crl.O.P.No.15069 of 2020
                                                         and
                                           Crl.MP.Nos.5736 and 5737 of 2020

                     1. Nallamuthu
                     2. Muthusamy                                        ... Petitioners

                                                            Vs.
                     1. The Inspector of Police,
                        Manglapuram Police Station,
                        Namakkal District.
                     2. Periyasamy                                      ... Respondents

                     PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the
                     Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to
                     CC.No.271 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court,
                     Rasipuram, Namakkal District and quash the same and allow the above
                     Criminal Original Petition.
                                     For Petitioner   : Mr.Kasi Rajan
                                                        for N.Anand
                                     For Respondents` : Mr.A.Gopinath
                                                       Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
                                                        for R1
                                                        No Appearance for R2
                                                        (Notice Served)


                     1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                Crl.OP.No.15069 of 2020

                                                            ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section

482 Cr.P.C, seeking orders to call for the records relating to C.C.No.271

of 2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Rasipuram,

Namakkal District and quash the same.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and

the petitioners are relatives and they are owing lands in the same village

adjacent to each other. There was a land dispute between the defacto

complainant's family and the petitioner's family, regarding the same, the

defacto complainant and others have filed a suit and the same is pending

and it is stated that the judgment is likely to be delivered by the District

Munsif Court, Rasipuram. When the matter stood thus, the petitioners

and one Ramasamy have abused the defacto complainant and assaulted

him with drumstick and with hands all over his body and stated that the

judgment will be delivered in their favour and why did he entered upon

their land. Subsequently, on seeing one Surya who came to scene of

occurrence, the petitioners intimidating the defacto complainant, escaped

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No.15069 of 2020

from the scene of occurrence. Thereby, the defacto complainant has

sustained injuries and he was taken to the hospital for treatment.

3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit

that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any

such offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that

followed by registration of the FIR , the first respondent police has

proceeded with investigation and filed the final report and the same was

taken cognizance by the learned Judicial Magistrate,, Rasipuram in

CC.No.271 of 2019. He further submitted that on completion of the

investigation, the first respondent themselves have filed the charge

alteration report dated 16.02.2019 stating that the son of the first

petitioner namely Ramasamy was not present at the scene of occurrence

and he has not involved in the offence at all and at the time of

occurrence, he was at some other place, accordingly, the said Ramasamy

was deleted from the charges. Hence he prayed to quash the same.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No.15069 of 2020

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit

that the trial has been commenced and some of the witnesses have also

been examined in this case.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and

the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first

respondent.

6. It is relevant to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court of India passed in Crl.A.No.579 of 2019 dated

02.04.2019 in the case of Devendra Prasad Singh Vs. State of Bihar &

Anr., in paragraph Nos.12 and 13, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has

held as follows:-

" 12.So far as the second ground is concerned, we are of the view that the High Court while hearing the application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. had no jurisdiction to appreciate the statement of the witnesses and record a finding that there were inconsistencies in their statements and,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No.15069 of 2020

therefore, there was no prima facie case made out against respondent No.2. In our view, this could be done only in the trial while deciding the issues on the merits or/and by the Appellate Court while deciding the appeal arising out of the final order passed by the Trial Court but not in Section 482 Cr.P.C. proceedings.

13.In view of the foregoing discussion, we allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order and restore the aforementioned complaint case to its original file for being proceeded with on merits in accordance with law.

7. Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India while dealing

with the very same issue in Crl.A.No.1572 of 2019 dated 17.10.2019 in

the case of Central Bureau of Invstigation Vs. Arvind Khanna, has

held as follows:

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No.15069 of 2020

“19. After perusing the impugned order and on hearing the submissions made by the learned senior counsels on both sides, we are of the view that the impugned order passed by the High Court is not sustainable. In a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the High Court has recorded findings on several disputed facts and allowed the petition. Defence of the accused is to be tested after appreciating the evidence during trial. The very fact that the High Court, in this case, went into the most minute details, on the allegations made by the appellant-C.B.I., and the defence put-forth by the respondent, led us to a conclusion that the High Court has exceeded its power, while exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

20.In our view, the assessment made by the High Court at this stage, when the matter has been taken cognizance by the Competent Court, is completely incorrect and uncalled for.”

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No.15069 of 2020

8. Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has also held in

in Crl.A.No.1817 of 2019 dated 02.12.2019 in the case of M.Jayanthi

Vs. K.R.Meenakshi & anr, as follows:

"9. It is too late in the day to seek reference to any authority for the proposition that while invoking the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing a complaint or a charge, the Court should not embark upon an enquiry into the validity of the evidence available. All that the Court should see is as to whether there are allegations in the complaint which form the basis for the ingredients that constitute certain offences complained of. The Court may also be entitled to see (i) whether the preconditions requisite for taking cognizance have been complied with or not; and (ii) whether the allegations contained in the complaint, even if accepted in entirety, would not constitute the offence alleged. ..............

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No.15069 of 2020

13. A look at the complaint filed by the appellant would show that the appellant had incorporated the ingredients necessary for prosecuting the respondents for the offences alleged. The question whether the appellant will be able to prove the allegations in a manner known to law would arise only at a later stage...................."

The above judgments are squarely applicable to this case and as such, the

points raised by the petitioner cannot be considered by this Court under

Section 482 Cr.P.C.

9. In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to

quash the proceedings in C.C.No.271 of 2019 in Crime No.9 of 2019 on

the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Rasipuram. The petitioners

are at liberty to raise all the grounds before the trial Court. The personal

appearance of the petitioners are dispensed with before the trial court.

However, the trial Court is directed to complete the trial within a period

of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.OP.No.15069 of 2020

10. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed.