V.Manoharan vs The State Represented By
2023 Latest Caselaw 14374 Mad

Madras High Court

V.Manoharan vs The State Represented By on 21 November, 2023

Author: A.D.Jagadish Chandira

Bench: A.D.Jagadish Chandira

                                                                                   Crl.O.P.No.26375 of 2023




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED : 21.11.2023

                                                        CORAM :

                      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

                                              Crl.O.P.No.26375 of 2023
                                            and Crl.M.P.No.18329 of 2023


                V.Manoharan                                                  ...       Petitioner

                                                             Vs.

                The State represented by,
                The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
                Vigilance and Anti-Corruption,
                Mayiladuthurai.                                              ...       Respondent

                PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal

                Procedure Code, pleased to call for the records in Spl.C.C.No.04 of 2023 on the

                file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mayiladuthuai and quash the same

                in so far as the petitioner is concerned.

                                       For Petitioner    :     Mr.P.Karthikeyan
                                       For Respondent :        Mr.C.E.Pratap
                                                               Government Advocate (Crl.Side)



                1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                   Crl.O.P.No.26375 of 2023



                                                          ORDER

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

records in Spl.C.C.No.04 of 2023 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Mayiladuthuai and quash the same in respect of the petitioner.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner (A5), who is a

Contractor, along with the accused 1 to 4, who were Junior Engineers and

Assistant Executive Engineers respectively in PWD/WRO, Cauvery Basin Sub-

Division (East), Mayiladuthurai, without doing the actual work, have inflated

the bills and cheated the Government.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner

other than being the contractor has not committed any offence. He further

submitted that only after the approval of the accused 1 to 4, the bills have been

passed, for which the petitioner cannot be held responsible.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted

that it is the case where the petitioner had conspired with other accused and by

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

fabricating the invoices and by raising inflated bills, had cheated the

Government to the tune of Rs.57,71,904/-. He also submitted that there are

ample materials to show the collusion between the petitioner and other accused.

He further submitted that the trial has been commenced and the case stands

posted on 07.12.2023.

5. At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

sought permission of this Court to withdraw the petition and also prayed that

the petitioner may be permitted to raise all the grounds before the trial Court.

He further submitted that the petitioner is aged about 71 years and thereby, he

prayed that the personal appearance of the petitioner before the trial Court, may

be dispensed with.

6. Accepting the said submission, the presence of the petitioner

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

present before the trial Court on initial questioning, reply to charges and at the

time of framing 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.

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

7. The petitioner is 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 him will cross examine the prosecution

witnesses on the same day they are examined in chief. The petitioner shall not

dispute the identity of the witnesses. The petitioner shall appear before the

Court in the event his presence is insisted by the trial Judge for the purpose of

identification or progress in trial. If the petitioner adopts any dilatorial tactics, it

is open to the trial Court to insist for his appearance and deal with the petitioner

in accordance with the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in State of

Uttar Pradesh Vs. Shambunath Singh, reported in 2001 (4) SCC 667.

8. In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing

for the petitioner, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn

with the above directions. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is

closed.

21.11.2023

Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking Neutral Citation : Yes / No ham

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

To

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Mayiladuthurai.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

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

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

ham

21.11.2023

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