Madras High Court
Kangeyavel vs The Inspector Of Police on 3 January, 2025
Author: N.Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N.Anand Venkatesh
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.503 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 03.01.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.503 of 2023
Kangeyavel ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police
Kalayarkovil Police Station
Sivagangai District. ... Respondent/Complainant
2.Mani @ Subramaniyan
3.Ayyappan ... Respondents/Accused in
SC.No.118/14
4.Kaleeswaran
5.Pachapillai ... Respondents/Accused in
SC.No.118/15
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of
Criminal Procedure Code, to withdraw the case in S.c.No.118 of 2014
and S.C.No.118 of 2015 (split-up from SC No.118/2014) on the file of
Principal District Judge, Sivagangai and transfer the same to any other
nearby district.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.503 of 2023
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Jeyamohan
For Respondents : Mr.S.Ravi
Additional Public Prosecutor
for R1
Mr.G.Karuppasamay Pandian for R4
No appearance for R2, R3, R5
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking for transfer of the case
pending in S.C.No.118 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District Judge,
Sivagangai to some other district.
2. The case of the petitioner is that his son-in-law was
murdered and an FIR came to be registered in Crime No.333 of 2000.
After investigation, the police report was filed and the same was taken on
file in S.C.No.5 of 2005 and the case was pending before the Principal
District Judge, Sivagangai. There were totally nine accused persons in
this case. Four accused persons underwent trial and by judgment dated
02.08.2017, all those accused persons (A1 to A4) were acquitted from all
charges. During the pendency of this case, the case was split-up in
S.C.No.118 of 2014 for two of the accused persons and S.C.No.118 of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2015 for the remaining two accused persons. Ultimately, both these cases
were clubbed and the case is now pending in S.C.No.118 of 2014 before
the Principal District Judge, Sivagangai where the remaining four
accused persons will have to face trial. At this juncture, the present
petition has been filed seeking for transfer of the case to some other
district mainly on the ground that the witnesses are being put to threat
and they are not able to effectively give giving evidence before the
Sivagangai Court. The other ground is that the brother of one of the
accused persons is a practising Advocate in the same Court and he is also
causing threat to the witnesses and ensuring that a fair trial is not
conducted in this case.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the first respondent
and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent.
4. The ground that was raised in this petition was also raised
in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15224 of 2023 which was filed to cancel the
anticipatory bail granted in favour of A2. This Court took into
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
consideration the threat perspective faced by the witnesses and also took
into consideration the present transfer petition pending and cancelled the
anticipatory bail granted in favour of A2.
5. Apart from the above, A2 moved an anticipatory bail
petition subsequently in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13257 of 2024 and a detailed
order was passed by this Court on 13.08.2024 by issuing certain
directions. It is informed that this petition was not listed thereafter. In the
mean time, A2 has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody.
6. As on today, out of the four accused persons, three
accused persons are inside jail and one of the accused person namely
Pachapillai was enlarged on bail considering his medical condition.
7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that
the case came up for hearing before the learned Principal District and
Sessions Judge, Sivagangai on 28.10.2024 and on that day, the Sessions
Judge had fixed the dates for trial from 17.12.2024 to 19.12.2024. When
the case was listed on 11.12.2024, it was brought to the notice of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
learned Sessions Judge that a petition has been filed before this Court
seeking for transfer of the case and hence, the trial Court kept the
proceedings in abeyance and the matter is listed on 08.01.2025.
8. The first apprehension raised is that the witnesses are
being subjected to threat and some of the witnesses are not allowed to
come before the Court to depose. The main accused persons are now
inside jail and therefore, it is improbable that they will cause any threat
to the witnesses. In any case, the respondent police shall ensure that
proper protection is given to the witnesses and that none of the witnesses
are subjected to any threat by the accused persons or others.
9. The second apprehension that has been raised by the
petitioner is that the brother of the one of the accused persons is
practising as an advocate in the same Court. In the instant case, the
prosecution case is conducted by the Public Prosecutor and the petitioner
has already filed an application before the trial Court seeking for
permission to assist the prosecution and the same has been allowed.
Therefore, just because the brother of one of the accused is practising as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
an advocate that by itself should not come in the way of the Public
Prosecutor conducting the case for the State and the counsel appearing
for the victim effectively assisting the prosecution. It goes without saying
that the trial Court will ensure that none of the witnesses are subjected to
any threat and none of the witnesses are prevented from deposing before
the Court. In other words, the trial Court shall effectively exercise its
power and jurisdiction under Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act.
10. The transfer of this case at this stage will only further
delay the trial and it must be kept in mind that three of the accused
persons are now inside jail. Therefore, with the above safeguards, the
trial can proceed further in this case before the same Court. When the
case comes up for hearing on 08.01.2025, the learned trial Judge shall fix
the date for examination of witnesses and shall ensure that the
examination of witnesses is concluded within the schedule fixed by the
trial Court. In any event, the trial Court shall ensure that the entire
proceedings are concluded within a period of three months.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
11. This Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with the
above directions.
03.01.2025
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
PKN
To
1.The Inspector of Police
Kalayarkovil Police Station
Sivagangai District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.
Note: Issue order copy on 06.01.2025.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
N.ANAND VENKATESH,J.
PKN
Dated: 03.01.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
