Madras High Court
Nagarajan vs State Represented By on 4 March, 2024
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10642 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 04.03.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10642 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P.(MD).Nos.6662 and 6664 of 2022
Nagarajan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.State represented by
the Inspector of Police,
Theni Police Station,
Theni District.
(Crime No.269 of 2019)
2.Surya Prakash ...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C, to call for the records pertaining to P.R.C.No.5 of 2020 on the file
of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Theni, Theni District in Crime No.269
of 2019 and quash the same.
For petitioner : Mr.A.Uthayakumar
For R-1 : Mr.P.Kottaichamy,
Government Advocate
(Criminal Side)
For R-2 : Mr.G.Karuppasamy Pandian
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10642 of 2022
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking to quash the
proceedings in P.R.C.No.5 of 2020 on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Theni, Theni District.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto
complainant is the son of the deceased. On 28.03.2019, the second
respondent’s father consumed poison and on the next day, he was
declared “dead”. Hence, the second respondent made a complaint before
the Allinagaram Police Station and the same was registered under Section
174 Cr.P.C and thereafter, it was transferred to the first respondent Police,
since his father has consumed poison at his Jeweller shop, which is
coming under the jurisdiction of the first respondent Police and the same
was registered in Crime No.269 of 2019 for the alleged offence
punishable under Section 306 IPC. The first respondent Police took up
the investigation and after investigation, it would reveal that the deceased
purchased gold articles from the petitioner in a loan basis and failed to
repay the amount. Thereafter, the petitioner and two others insisted upon
the deceased to repay the amount. Due to which, the deceased committed
suicide.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
submit that a false case has been foisted against the petitioner and there
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10642 of 2022
is no specific allegation as against the petitioner. He would further
submit that the proceedings in P.R.C.No.5 of 2020 was now committed to
the Sessions Court and after committal, the case was taken on file in
S.C.No.35 of 2022 and the same was made over to the Chief Judicial
Magistrate Court, Theni and now, it is pending.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
appearing for the respondent Police would submit that all those points
raised before this Court is a triable issue, which cannot be canvassed
before this Court and it can be canvassed only at the time of trial.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the second
respondent.
6. In the above circumstances, the trial court has rightly
taken the case on file and this Court is of the considered view that no
prejudice would be caused to the petitioner, if he is subjected to due trial
as sufficient opportunity would be given to the petitioner to put forth his
defence. The petitioner cannot be let by quashing the charges framed
against him as that would completely undermine the alleged act, which is
the subject matter of criminal trial pending against him. Useful reference
in this regard can be made to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in
State of Haryana – Vs - Bhajan Lal (1992 SCC (Crl.) 426)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10642 of 2022
7. For the reasons aforesaid, this Court finds no ground or
scope to quash S.C.No.35 of 2022 before the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Theni. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is
dismissed. Consequently, the connnected miscellaneous petitions are
closed.
8. At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner would submit that this Court may consider to dispense with the
personal appearance of the petitioner before the court below. Taking into
consideration the request as made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, the appearance of the petitioner before the trial court is
dispensed with except for his appearance for the purpose of receiving the
copy of the proceedings u/s 207 Cr.P.C., framing of charges, questioning
under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and on the day on which judgment is to be
pronounced. However, if for any particular reason, the presence of the
petitioner is necessary, the trial court, at its wisdom, shall direct his
appearance on those days.
04.03.2024
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
TSG
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10642 of 2022
To
1.The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Theni Police Station,
Theni 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.10642 of 2022
M.DHANDAPANI. J.
TSG
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10642 of 2022
04.03.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
