Madras High Court
M.A.Alavudeen vs The State Rep. By on 3 March, 2022
Crl.O.P(MD)No.177 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED:03.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
Crl.O.P(MD)No.177 of 2020
and
Crl.M.P(MD)No.51 of 2020
1.M.A.Alavudeen
2.A.Palkeesh @ Bhuvaneswari
... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2
Vs.
1.The State rep. by,
The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Palakkarai Police Station,
Tiruchirappalli – 1.
(In Crime No.319 of 2013) .... 1st Respondent/Complainant
2.N.Syed Shahul Hameed ... 2nd respondent/defacto complainant
PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the
records relating to the proceedings in C.C.No.21 of 2015 on the file of
the Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy and quash the same as against the
petitioners.
For Petitioners : Mr.V.Illanchezian
For R-1 : Mr.A.Thirvadi Kumar,
Additional Public Prosecutor
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P(MD)No.177 of 2020
For R-2 : Mr.R.Sundar
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the
final report filed against these petitioners in Crime No.391 of 2013
registered on the file of the first respondent police for the offence under
Sections 120(b), 418, 420, 463, 468, 506(i) of I.P.C, which has been
taken on file in C.C.No.21 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate No.V, Trichy.
2. The crux of the allegation is that the petitioners induced the
defacto complainant to entered into a partnership business and to part
with huge amount with an intention to cheat him. They have also forged
some documents. The matter culminated into final report after examining
several witnesses.
3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is
that it is only a civil dispute and arising out of a partnership business and
there cannot be any charge against the petitioners. It is also submitted
by the learned counsel for the petitioners that for the same breach of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P(MD)No.177 of 2020
contract, the petitioners already convicted in C.C.No.269 of 2013 on the
file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy, vide judgment dated
18.03.2019.
3. It is also stated that one of the accused namely the third
accused filed Crl.O.P(MD)No.3533 of 2017 wherein this Court vide
order dated 01.11.2019 has quashed the proceedings against the third
accused. Therefore, the present accused are also entitled to the same
benefit.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and
perused the materials available on record.
5. In the order dated 01.11.2019, this Court has recorded the
fact that there are materials against A-1 and A-2 the petitioners herein in
both the F.I.R and the final report. Hence, after finding them, quashed
the proceedings only against the A-3. Therefore, when there is prima
facie material against the petitioners, this petition to quash the final
report will not at all arise. Whether the charge framed in C.C.No.269 of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P(MD)No.177 of 2020
2013 are arising out of the same complaint and allegations or not, has to
be seen by the learned trial Judge. If same set of allegations are pressed
into service, the findings given earlier have also to be taken note of by
the trial Court while deciding the present case.
With the above observations, this Criminal Original Petition is
dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
03.03.2022
Index :Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
pm
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.V,
Trichy.
2.The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Palakkarai Police Station,
Tiruchirappalli – 1.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P(MD)No.177 of 2020
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
pm
Crl.O.P(MD)No.177 of 2020
03.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
