Madras High Court
Karaikkudi Chettiar @ Sunilkumar vs State on 28 June, 2022
CRL.O.P.No.19423 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.06.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRL.O.P.No. 19423 of 2020
and Crl.M.P.No. 7800 of 2020
Karaikkudi Chettiar @ Sunilkumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. State, represented by the
Inspector of Police,
Vellakkoil Police Station,
Tiruppur District.
2. S. Mohamed Rafiq ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
praying to quash the FIR in Crime No.1753 of 2020 on the file of the first
respondent.
For Petitioner : Mr.O.S.Thilak Pasumbadiyar
For R1 : Mr.A.Gopinath
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
For R2 : No appearance
ORDER
This petition has been filed to quash the F.I.R. in Crime No.1753 of
2020 registered by the first respondent police for the offences under Sections
120(B), 171 and 420 of IPC, as against the petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.19423 of 2020
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence
as alleged by the prosecution. Without any base, the first respondent police
registered a case in Crime No. 1753 of 2020 for the offences under Sections
120(B), 171 and 420 of IPC, as against the petitioner. Hence he prayed to
quash the same.
3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit
that the investigation is almost completed and the respondent police have only
to file final report.
4. Heard Mr. O.S.Thilak Pasumbadiyar, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner and Mr.A.Gopinath, learned Government Advocate (Criminal
Side) appearing for the first respondent.
5. It is seen from the First Information Report that there are specific
allegations as against the petitioner to attract the offences, which has to be
investigated in depth. Further the FIR is not an encyclopedia and it need not
contain all facts and it cannot be quashed in the threshold. This Court finds
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.19423 of 2020
that the FIR discloses prima facie commission of cognizable offence and as
such this Court cannot interfere with the investigation. The investigating
machinery has to step in to investigate, grab and unearth the crime in
accordance with the procedures prescribed in the Code.
6. It is relevant to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India passed in Crl.A.No.255 of 2019 dated 12.02.2019 in the case of
Sau. Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar vs. the State of Maharashtra & ors., as
follows:-
"4. The only point that arises for our
consideration in this case is whether the High Court
was right in setting aside the order by which
process was issued. It is settled law that the
Magistrate, at the stage of taking cognizance and
summoning, is required to apply his judicial mind
only with a view to taking cognizance of the offence,
or in other words, to find out whether a prima facie
case has been made out for summoning the accused
persons. The learned Magistrate is not required to
evaluate the merits of the material or evidence in
support of the complaint, because the Magistrate
must not undertake the exercise to find out whether
the materials would lead to a conviction or not.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.19423 of 2020
5. Quashing the criminal proceedings is
called for only in a case where the complaint does
not disclose any offence, or is frivolous, vexatious,
or oppressive. If the allegations set out in the
complaint do not constitute the offence of which
cognizance has been taken by the Magistrate, it is
open to the High Court to quash the same. It is
not necessary that a meticulous analysis of the
case should be done before the Trial to find out
whether the case would end in conviction or
acquittal. If it appears on a reading of the
complaint and consideration of the allegations
therein, in the light of the statement made on oath
that the ingredients of the offence are disclosed,
there would be no justification for the High Court
to interfere.
......................
9. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel
and examined the material on record, we are of
the considered view that the High Court ought not
to have set aside the order passed by the Trial
Court issuing summons to the Respondents. A
perusal of the complaint discloses that prima
facie, offences that are alleged against the
Respondents. The correctness or otherwise of the
said allegations has to be decided only in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.19423 of 2020
Trial. At the initial stage of issuance of process it
is not open to the Courts to stifle the proceedings
by entering into the merits of the contentions made
on behalf of the accused. Criminal complaints
cannot be quashed only on the ground that the
allegations made therein appear to be of a civil
nature. If the ingredients of the offence alleged
against the accused are prima facie made out in
the complaint, the criminal proceeding shall not
be interdicted."
7. In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to
quash the First Information Report. Accordingly, this Criminal Original
Petition stands dismissed. However, considering the crime is of the year 2020,
the first respondent is directed to complete the investigation in Crime No.1753
of 2020 and file a final report within a period of twelve weeks from the date of
receipt of copy of this Order, before the jurisdiction Magistrate, if not already
filed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
28.06.2022
Internet : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Speaking / Non Speaking order
Lpp
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.19423 of 2020
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
Lpp
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
Vellakkoil Police Station,
Tiruppur District.
2. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
Crl.O.P.No.19423 of 2020
28.06.2022.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
