Madras High Court
Jeyarajan vs The Inspector Of Police on 2 June, 2025
Author: B.Pugalendhi
Bench: B.Pugalendhi
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8335 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 02.06.2025
CORAM :
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8335 of 2025
and
Crl.M.P.(MD)No.6408 of 2025
Jeyarajan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police,
Usilampatty Town Police Station,
Usilampatty,
Madurai District.
In Cr.No.134 of 2025.
2.Nadarajan ... Respondents
Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 BNSS, to call for
the entire records connected with the impugned FIR in Cr.No.134 of 2025
dated 02.04.2025 filed by the first respondent and quash the same insofar as
the petitioner/1st accused is concerned.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.K.Kannan
For R1 : Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad,
Government Advocate(Crl.side)
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 04:26:46 pm )
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8335 of 2025
ORDER
This criminal original petition has been filed to quash the first
information report in Cr.No.134 of 2025 pending on the file of the first
respondent Police, which was registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 191(2), 329(3), 324(4), 296(b) and 351(2) BNS.
2.The case of defecto complainant is that he is administering the
society and Nadar Saraswathi Higher Secondary School as per the
judgement and degree passed in O.S.No.16 of 2015 dated 29.03.2023
and A.S.No.21 of 2023 dated 18.12.2024. An election of the Society
was conducted by the Advocate Commissioner on 22.12.2024, in which,
the defacto complainant was elected as Office Bearer and the same has
been approved by the District Registrar and he assumed charges on
22.12.2024. While so, the petitioner, who lost the civil suit, has filed
second appeal and obtained an order of status-quo in CMP.(MD)No.
1569 of 2025 in S.A.(MD)No.71 of 2025 dated 13.01.2025. Taking
advantage of the status-quo granted by this Court, he has broke-open the
chamber and also threatened the Headmaster and Teachers that he is the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 04:26:46 pm )
administrator of this school. Therefore, defecto complainant has lodged
the above complaint that the petitioner is attempting to interfere with the
administration, as against the judgment of the Civil Court.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that
though the trial Court and the first appellate Court passed a decree in
favour of the second respondent, the petitioner has obtained an order of
status-quo in CMP.(MD)No.1569 of 2025 in S.A.(MD)No.71 of 2025
dated 13.01.2025. According to the petitioner, he is administering the
Society and the School and he is having several records to establish that
he is in administration. Therefore, according to the learned counsel for
the petitioner, this case is a foisted one.
4.Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad, learned Government Advocate(Crl.side)
takes notice for the first respondent and submits that investigation in Cr.No.
134 of 2025 is pending.
5.This Court has considered the submissions made on either side and
perused the available records.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 04:26:46 pm )
6.The nature of complaint is with regard to the disturbance made by the
petitioner in the administration of Society, which is running a School, namely,
Nadar Saraswathi Higher Secondary School at Usilampatti. The civil Court
has passed a decree in favour of the defacto complainant. However, the
second appeal filed by the petitioner has also been entertained and an order of
status-quo has been passed. The allegation against the petitioner is that he
entered into premises of the School by taking advantage of the interim order
and he has also broke-open the Secretary Chamber and also threatened the
Headmaster and Teachers. The petitioner claims that he has several
documents to prove that he is in administration and he is paying salary to the
Teachers.
7.The investigation is a process to find out the truth. The Investigating
Officer is expected to conduct the investigation in a fair and proper manner to
find out the truth and then, take a decision either to file a final report or to
close the complaint. In the process of investigation, the investigation Officer
is not supposed to conduct the investigation in a mechanical manner based on
the materials, which was furnished by the defacto complainant alone. The
materials, if any produced by the petitioner also needs to be considered and
then, final decision has to be taken by the Investigating Officer. Since the
investigation is pending, at this stage, this court is not inclined to interfere
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 04:26:46 pm )
with the investigation. In the event if any final report has been filed as against
the petitioner, it is always open to the petitioner to challenge the same,
provided if he is having any materials.
8.In view of the above discussion, this criminal original petition is
closed with liberty to the petitioner to produce all materials before the
Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer is directed to consider the
materials to be furnished by the petitioner and also the grounds raised in this
petition. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
02.06.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Internet:Yes
gns
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Usilampatty Town Police Station,
Usilampatty,
Madurai District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 04:26:46 pm )
B.PUGALENDHI,J
gns
02.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/06/2025 04:26:46 pm )
