Bakkiyaraj vs The Sub Inspector Of Police
2022 Latest Caselaw 4844 Mad

                                                                                 Crl.O.P. No.5461 of 2022


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 10.03.2022

                                                       CORAM

                         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

                                               Crl.O.P.No.5461 of 2022
                                         and Crl.M.P.Nos.2987 & 2989 of 2022
                     1.Bakkiyaraj
                     2.Pandiyan
                     3.Kodiyarasi                                                      ... Petitioners

                                                          Vs

                     1.The Sub Inspector of Police,
                       Ramanatham Police Station,
                       Cuddalore District.
                       Crime No.235 of 2019

                     2.Maariyammal                                                  ... Respondents

                     PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
                     praying to call for the records relating to C.C.No.4 of 2020 on the file
                     Judicial Magistrate Court, Thittakudi and quash the same.


                                    For Petitioners   : Mr.M.Velmurugan

                                    For Respondents : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan
                                                      Additional Public Prosecutor for R1
                                                      No appearance for R2



                     1/5


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                     Crl.O.P. No.5461 of 2022




                                                            ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to call for the

records relating to C.C.No.4 of 2020 on the file Judicial Magistrate Court,

Thittakudi and quash the same.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that

there is a civil dispute between the parties. Taking into consideration the

entire materials available on record, the offences alleged is not made out

against the accused.

3.Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit

that the petitioners have assaulted the de-facto complainant. There are

sufficient materials to substantiate the charges against the petitioners. He

would further submit that the grounds raised by the petitioners is factual in

nature and no legal ground has been raised.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P. No.5461 of 2022

4. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that

the personal appearance of the petitioners before the trial Court, may be

dispensed with.

5.Accepting the said submission, the presence of the petitioners,

before the trial Court shall be dispensed with on condition that the

petitioners shall be present on the first day of appearance, on the date fixed

for receiving the copies, initial questioning, reply to charges and

questioning under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., and at the time of passing

judgment and whenever insisted upon by the trial court.

6. The petitioners are further directed to give an undertaking in the

form of affidavit that he will be duly represented by a counsel on all hearing

dates and that the Counsel representing them will cross examine the

prosecution witnesses on the same day they are examined in chief. The

petitioners shall not dispute the identity of the witnesses. The petitioners

shall appear before the Court in the event of their presence is insisted by the

trial judge for the purpose of identification. If the petitioners adopt any

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P. No.5461 of 2022

dilatorial tactics, it is open to the Trial Court to insist for their appearance

and deal with in accordance with the judgement of Supreme Court of India,

in State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Shambunath Singh, reported in 2001 (4)

SCC 667.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition in Crl.M.P.No.2987 of

2022 stands closed and Crl.M.P.No.2989 of 2022 is partly allowed.

10.03.2022

Index:Yes/no Speaking Order:Yes/No vkr

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Thittakkudi.

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Ramanatham Police Station, Cuddalore District.

Crime No.235 of 2019

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P. No.5461 of 2022

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

vkr

Crl.O.P.No.5461 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.Nos.2987 & 2989 of 2022

10.03.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis