Madras High Court
Pachamuthu vs Https://Www.Mhc.Tn.Gov.In/Judis on 24 November, 2023
Author: G.Jayachandran
Bench: G.Jayachandran
Crl.O.P.No.22514 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 24.11.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
Crl.O.P.No.22514 of 2023
and
Crl.M.P. Nos.15706 & 15710 of 2023
1.Pachamuthu
2.Murugesan
3.Saravanan
4.Boopathi
5.Vijay
6.Seeni @ Srinivasan
7.Anand
8.Mariyappan
9.Arumugam
10.Mohan @ Mohanraj
11.Selvam @ Selvakumar
12.Manikandan
13.Sathya
14.S.Anbarasu
... Petitioners
-vs-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.1/6
Crl.O.P.No.22514 of 2023
1.State Represented by its,
The Inspector of Police,
Kondalampatti Police Station,
Salem.
(Cr. No.79 of 2020)
2.Sekar
...Respondents
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of
Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records relating to C.C.NO. 1210 of
2020 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.V, Salem and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz
For Respondent No.1 :Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
This petition is filed to quash the final report taken on file by the learned
Judicial Magistrate No.V, Salem and assigned C.C. No.1210 of 2020.
2. The petitioners, claiming that there is a dispute between the
Dharmaharthas of Arulmighu Mariyamman Temple at Morambakkadu
followed by a Civil Suit filed by the second respondent herein in O.S. No.30 of
2020 on the file of the learned II Additional District Munsif, Salem against the
first petitioner, seeking injunction. Whileso, on 04.02.2020 at 10.15 p.m, when
the petitioners were performed procession of the deity, quarrel has been erupted
between the two groups.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. The second petitioner herein lodged a complaint against the second
respondent and others, the same has been taken for investigation by the
respondent police in Crime No.80 of 2020, which has culminated in filing final
report. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Salem has taken cognizance of
the offence and assigned C.C. No.533 of 2020. Whileso, the first respondent
police has also registered a complaint against these petitioners in Crime No.79
of 2019 in respect of the very same incident and the said case has culminated in
C.C. No.1210 of 2022. Both the case and case in counter are pending before
the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Salem, wherein, the second respondent
and his men are the aggressors. However, they were able to manipulate to file a
final report for offence under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 323, 324 and
506(ii) IPC.
4. Citing of the judgment in the grounds of appeal and findings of the
Court regarding the ingredients of the above mentioning Sections, the learned
counsel for the petitioner submitted that a case warrants interference by the
High Court by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C, in the light of the
judgement rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of Haryana Vs.
Bhajanlal reported in (1992 Supp (1) SCC 335).
5. The learned Government Advocate submits that since there was
dispute between Hereditary Dharmaharthas and Appointed Dharmahartha in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
respect of managing the temple, the Tahsildar called both the parties and
convened a peace committee meeting. Wherein, the parties did not agree for an
amicable settlement. Hence, order was passed by the Tahsildar that neither of
the parties should perform the procession. Defying the order of the Tahsildar,
the petitioners proceeded with the deity procession on 04.02.2020 which has
led to clash between the two groups. Members of both the groups sustained
injuries caused by weapon by members of unlawful assembly and therefore,
two cases in Crime Nos.79 of 2020 and 80 of 2020 was registered. After
investigation, final report been filed and taken cognizance by the learned
Judicial Magistrate.
6. In the light of the above facts, this Court finds that by defying the
order of the Executive Magistrate, the petitioners have proceeded with deity
procession leading to clash between two parties, causing injuries to each other.
Hence every ingredients required to proceed against them for the offence under
Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 323, 324 and 506(ii) IPC are prima facie made
out. Hence, this Court finds no merits in this petition to quash and this petition
is dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also
dismissed.
24.11.2023
Internet : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
rkp
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate No.V,
Salem.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Kondalampatti Police Station,
Salem.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
rkp
and
Crl.M.P. Nos.15706 & 15710 of 2023
24.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
