Madras High Court
Palanisamy vs The State Rep By on 11 November, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.20740 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11.11.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
CRL.O.P.(MD)No.20740 of 2018
and
CRL.M.P.(MD)Nos.9585 and 9586 of 2018
Palanisamy ... Petitioner/Accused No.1
Vs.
1.The State rep by
The Sub Inspector of Police,
Ambasamudram Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
(Crime No.203 of 2015) ... Respondent/Complainant
2.Murugesan ... Respondent/Defacto
Complainant
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the case in C.C.No.251 of
2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamudram,
Tirunelveli District and quash the same as against the petitioner.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.20740 of 2018
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Anand
For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthikumar, - for R1
Government Advocate (Crl. side)
:Mr.C.Saravanan-for R2
ORDER
This petition has been filed challenging the proceedings in
C.C.No.251 of 2016, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate,
Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District.
2.Heard Mr.R.Anand, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner, Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, learned Government Advocate (Crl.
side), appearing for the State and Mr.C.Saravanan, learned counsel
appearing for the second respondent.
3. The grounds raised by the counsel for the petitioner are all
factual in nature and it requires appreciation of evidence and this Court
cannot decide the same in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482
of Criminal Procedure Code. It is left open to the petitioner to raise all
the grounds before the Court below and the same shall be considered on
its own merits and in accordance with law. This Court is not inclined to
interfere with the proceedings pending before the Court below.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.20740 of 2018
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner requested this
Court to dispense with the presence of the petitioner. Taking into
consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the presence of the
petitioner is dispensed with and he shall be represented by a counsel,
who shall cross examine the witnesses on the same day or on the next
hearing date, after they are examined in Chief. The petitioner shall not
dispute the identity of the witnesses. The petitioner shall be present
before the Court below as and when directed by the Court below and
shall be present at the time of questioning under Section 313(1)(b) Cr.P.C
and at the time of passing of the final judgment.
5. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed
of with a direction to the Court below to complete the proceedings in
C.C.No.251 of 2016 within a period of four months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. The trial shall be conducted on a day to
day basis in accordance with the guidelines given by Hon'ble Supreme
Court reported in Vinod Kumar Vs State of Punjab [2015 (1) MLJ (Crl)
288 SC]. If the petitioner adopts any dilatory tactics, it is open to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.20740 of 2018
trial Court to insist upon the presence of the petitioner and remand
him to custody as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. SHAMBHU NATH SINGH (JT
2001 (4) SC 3191). Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are
also closed.
11.11.2022
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Ns
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate,
Ambasamudram,
Tirunelveli District.
2.The Sub Inspector of Police,
Ambasamudram Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.20740 of 2018
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
Ns
CRL.O.P.(MD)No.20740 of 2018
and
CRL.M.P.(MD)Nos.9585 and 9586 of 2018
11.11.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
