Madras High Court
R.Kesavan vs The Inspector Of Police on 27 October, 2025
Author: A.D.Jagadish Chandira
Bench: A.D.Jagadish Chandira
CRL OP No. 29060 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-10-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
CRL OP No. 29060 of 2025
1. R.Kesavan
Late Rajendran, No.4/390, North Street,
Chozhanganallur, Puzhuthikudi,
Thiruvarur, Mannarugudi-614 708
2. M.Ganesan
S/o.Moorthy, No.44/1, Rajaji 3rd Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Inspector of Police
EDF-III, New Team , Previously EDF-
II, Team IX-A, Central Crime Branch,
Vepery, Chennai-600 007
2.J.New Man
S/o.late. John raj, No.57, North street,
Crawford, trichy
Respondent(s)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2025 01:20:24 pm )
CRL OP No. 29060 of 2025
PRAYER
To quash the final report filed by the 1st respondent in CC.No.6202/2018
pending on the file of the Honble Metropolitan Magistrate for CBCID and CCB
Cases at Egmore as against the petitioners A6 and A7.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.D.Veerakumar
For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Vinothraja, Govt.Advocate
(Criminal Side) For R1
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed praying to quash the final
report filed by the 1st respondent in CC.No.6202/2018 pending on the file of
learned Metropolitan Magistrate for CBCID and CCB Cases at Egmore as
against the petitioners viz., A6 and A7.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the
petitioners are respectively drivers of the main accused. Their names have been
unnecessarily dragged in this case. Since there happens to be some financial
transaction between these petitioners and the main accused company, the
petitioners have been added in the case. However, there was no common
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2025 01:20:24 pm )
intention along with main accused in respect of allegation of cheating funds of
the de facto complainant. He would further submit that absolutely there is
nothing as if these petitioners induced the defacto complainant for deposit of
funds in the petitioner's company started in their names or the other company of
the main accused.
3. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would
submit that petitioners though claimed to be drivers of the main accused, they
have floated several partnership firms along with other main accused. Thereby,
the de facto complainant was cheated by them. There are materials to implicate
these petitioners and there are substantive materials to show that certain
amounts have gone into the accounts of the petitioners and there is common
intention along with other accused in cheating the de facto complainant for
funds and there are also other materials to show the petitioners' involvement in
the case.
4. The Calendar Case is of the year 2018 and charges have been framed
and the case now is posted for examination of L.W.1 on 04.11.2025.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2025 01:20:24 pm )
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that the
petitioners personal appearance before the trial court may be dispensed with,
unless their presence is required for the purpose of progress of trial. He would
further submit that they are also ready to file an affidavit of undertaking that
they will be duly represented by a counsel before the Trial Court on all hearing
dates and they will be present before the Trial Court for receipt of copies,
answering the charges, questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C., passing of
judgment and for any other purpose, as may be required by the Trial Court for
the purpose of progress of trial.
6. Taking into consideration the facts of the case, this Court is of the
view that all the grounds can be raised before the Trial Court and there is no
merit in the quash petition.
7. However, accepting the submission made by the learned counsel for the
petitioners, the presence of the petitioners before the Trial Court is dispensed
with. The petitioners are directed to give an undertaking in the form of affidavit
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2025 01:20:24 pm )
as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners at paragraph 5, supra. If
the petitioners adopt any dilatory tactics, it is open to the Trial Court to insist for
their appearance and deal with them in accordance with the judgment of the
Supreme Court of India in State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Shambunath Singh,
reported in 2001 (4) SCC 667.
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of on the
above terms.
27-10-2025
nvsri
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
To
1.The Inspector of Police
EDF-III, New Team , Previously EDF-
II, Team IX-A, Central Crime Branch,
Vepery, Chennai-600 007
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2025 01:20:24 pm )
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
nvsri
27-10-2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2025 01:20:24 pm )
