Madras High Court
Ramar vs The Inspector Of Police on 16 August, 2024
Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19719 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 16.08.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19719 of 2021
and
Crl.M.P.(MD)No.11069 of 2021
1.Ramar
2.Chellammal
3.Chellapandi
4.Meenakshi ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 4
vs.
1.The Inspector of Police,
Palanichettypatti Police Station,
Theni District. ... 1st Respondent/Complainant
2.U.Raju ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto
Complainant
Prayer:- Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records
pertaining to the S.T.C.No.331 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate No.II, Usilampatti, Madurai District and quash the same as
illegal.
For Petitioners : Mr.K.Anbumanikandan
For Respondent : Mrs.M.Aasha
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition is filed to quash the proceedings
in S.T.C.No.331 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate
No.II, Usilampatti, Madurai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19719 of 2021
2. The charge against the petitioners in the said case is that on
06.08.2024, when the defacto complainant / Revenue officials sought to
clear and prepare the lands for the purpose of carrying out Mandragora
work in S.Nos.284/36, 287/31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 288/28, 29, 30,
31, 33, 34, 35 and 291/24. The petitioners accused claimed that they have
got patta with reference to S.No.291/24 and prevented the officials from
carrying out their official duty.
3. On a perusal of the material records of the case and the
statement of the witnesses, it can be seen that the first petitioner has got a
decree in O.S.No.556 of 2014 on the file of the learned District Munsif
cum Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur, in his favour with reference to
S.No.219/4. The suit itself is filed against the President and Block
Development Officer, Sedapatti Union. Therefore, when the petitioners
approached the civil court and got a decree against the local president of
the village that their patta land cannot be encroached upon for the purpose
of MNREGA activities, once again, in the guise of preparing for the
MNREGA activity, the petitioners' land also sought to be included in the
survey. The statement of the witnesses clearly shows that the petitioners
insisted that to first demarcate the said piece of land and therefore, they
can carry out the work in the rest of the land.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19719 of 2021
4. In view of the judgment of the civil Court in their favour and
granting a permanent injunction against the Panchayath President and the
Block Development Officer and in view of the petitioners' statement that
they only insisted the officials to first demarcate the said piece of land and
thereafter, carry on the work, I'm of the view that, even considering the
allegations on the face value and the offence is not made out against the
petitioners, especially when the petitioners have got a Civil Court decree in
their favour, the proceedings pending against them is liable to be quashed.
5.Accordingly, the proceedings in S.T.C.No.331 of 2015 on the
file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Usilampatti, Madurai District,
is hereby quashed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
16.08.2024
NCC :Yes/No
Index :Yes/No
Internet : Yes/ No
dss
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19719 of 2021
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
dss
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate No.II,
Usilampatti, Madurai District
2.The Inspector of Police,
Palanichettypatti Police Station,
Theni District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19719 of 2021
and
Crl.M.P.(MD)No.11069 of 2021
16.08.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
