Madras High Court
S.Sankar Ganesh vs The Inspector Of Police on 5 September, 2022
CRL.O.P.No.20867 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.09.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRL.O.P.No. 20867 of 2022
and Crl.MP.No. 13649 of 2022
S.Sankar Ganesh .. Petitioner
Versus
1.The Inspector of Police
D-1, Fairland Police Station
Salem Town
Salem
(Crime No.431/2022)
2. Vignesh ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
praying to call for the records and quash the FIR in Crime No. 431 of 2022 on
the file of Inspector of Police, D1-Perlands Police Station, Salem Town, Salem,
the first respondent herein.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.V.Sridharan
For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak for R1
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
This petition has been filed to quash the F.I.R. in Crime No. 431 of 2022
registered by the first respondent police for the offences under Sections 3(1),
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.20867 of 2022
4(1), 5(1)(d) & 7(1)(a) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 as against
the petitioner.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 29.06.2022, the defacto
complainant made a complaint before the respondent police stating that illegal
brothel activities is being performed at the petitioner's spa premises, based on
the complaint, the impugned FIR has been registered.
3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
the petitioner is an innocent person and he was not present in the scene of
occurrence and further submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the
FIR. Hence he prayed to quash the same.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent police.
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 deapth. Further the FIR is not an encyclopedia and it need not
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.20867 of 2022
contain all facts and it cannot be quashed in the threshold. This Court finds
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.20867 of 2022
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.
......................
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.20867 of 2022
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 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, the first respondent is directed to complete the
investigation in Crime No.431 of 2022 and file a final report within a period of
12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order, before the jurisdiction
Magistrate, if not already filed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petition is closed.
05.09.2022
Internet : Yes / No
dhk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.20867 of 2022
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
dhk
To
1.The Inspector of Police
D-1, Fairland Police Station
Salem Town
Salem
2. The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court.
Crl.O.P.No.20867 of 2022
05.09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
