Madras High Court
Perumal @ Arunachalam vs State Through on 9 March, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1127 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 09.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1127 of 2022
in
Crl.M.P.(MD) No.801 of 2022
1. Perumal @ Arunachalam
2. Ganavel @ Gnanavel
3. Krishnan
4. S.Suresh ...Petitioners/
Accused No.1 to 4
Vs.
1. State through
The Inspector of Police,
Valanadu Police Station,
Trichy District.
Crime No.22 of 2020. ...1st Respondent/
Complainant
2. Ravindran ...2nd Respondent/
Defacto Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying
this Court to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned FIR in Crime
No.22 of 2020 dated 29.01.2020, on the file of the 1st respondent Police and to
quash the same Accused 1 to 4 as illegal.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1127 of 2022
For Petitioners : M/s.S.Gopala Manikandan
For R1 : Mr.M.Aasha
Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
For R2 : Mr. A.Chandrasekaran
ORDER
The petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.22 of 2020
on the file of the first respondent police.
2.Though compromise memo has been filed by the petitioners and the
defacto complainant, no one present for the past three occasions. It shows
that there is no compromise between them.
3.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the
Village Administrative Officer at Thirunellipatti Village. On 28.01.2020,
during patrol, the defacto complainant along with three other Village
Administrative Officers were intercepted a tractor, which was illegally
transported sand without proper permission. But they not stopped the vehicle
and it was followed by two more tractors. Therefore, the defacto complainant
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1127 of 2022
along with his subordinates followed the said tractors and found that the
petitioners accumulated sand illegally. While being so, the first petitioner
used filthy languages and stated that they took sand from the Ochan pond
without any permission. The defacto complainant captured this in his mobile
phone, suddenly other accused gathered and tried to attack the officials and
the village people too tried to attack the officials. Therefore, the defacto
complainant lodged a complaint before the first respondent and the same has
been registered in Crime No.22 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 147,
294(b), 341, 427, 353 and 506(i) of IPC.
4.It is also 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 - 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1127 of 2022
complaint, because the Magistrate must not
undertake the exercise to find out whether the
materials would lead to a conviction or not.
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.
6.........
7.........
8........
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
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1127 of 2022
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."
5.In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to quash
the First Information Report. Hence this Criminal Original Petition stands
dismissed. However, the first respondent police is directed to complete the
investigation and file final report before the concerned Magistrate, within a
period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
6.However, the petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh petition to quash
the FIR, if the parties entered in compromise.
09.03.2022
Internet:Yes
Index:Yes/No
lr
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1127 of 2022
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.
lr
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
Valanadu Police Station,
Trichy District.
Crime No.22 of 2020.
2. The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1127 of 2022
09.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
