Madras High Court
Julious vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 13 August, 2020
Author: V.Bharathidasan
Bench: V.Bharathidasan
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.17299 of 2016
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 13.08.2020
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.17299 of 2016
and
Crl.M.P.(MD)No.8569 of 2016
1.Julious
2.Jaison
3.S.Arun David
4.E.Bensam
5.Ashis Jackson
6.Redlin Winny
7.Gifton Daniel
8.Ajith @ Ajithkumar
9.Lambert @ Lambert Rajaprakash
10.Shaju S.Kumar
11.Ninu Jeyasingh
12.N.Selvin
13.Nibu Jeyasingh : Petitioners
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by the Inspector of Police,
Eraniel Police Station,
Kanyakumari District.
2.L.Sagaya Naveen
3.The Secretary,
CSI Church,
Neyyoor and Post,
Kanyakumari District. : Respondents
Prayer: Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying
to call for the records pertaining to the First Information Report in Crime No.887 of
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/4
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.17299 of 2016
2015 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same insofar as the case
against the petitioners are concerned.
For Petitioners : No Appearance
For Respondent No.1: Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi,
Government Advocate (Crl.side)
For Respondent No.2 : No Appearance
*****
ORDER
Earlier, when the matter came up for hearing on 14.07.2020, at the request of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the matter was adjourned by two weeks. Again, the matter was listed on 30.07.2020 and on that day, the learned counsel for the petitioners could not be connected and hence, it was adjourned to 03.08.2020 'for orders'. Thereafter, the matter is listed today (13.08.2020) 'for orders'. Even today, when the matter is called, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners.
2. The present quash petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report registered in Crime No.887 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 323, 387, 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) of TNPPDL Act.
3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the first respondent, on instructions, submitted that pending the present quash petition, investigation in this crime was over and the first respondent police also filed a final report and the learned Magistrate concerned has taken cognizance of the offence and now the matter is pending in P.R.C.No.28 of 2020 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel.
http://www.judis.nic.in 2/4 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.17299 of 2016
4. Considering the fact that already investigation in Crime No.887 of 2015 has been completed and final report has also been filed and the learned Magistrate concerned has taken cognizance of the offence, at this stage, this Court is of the view that the First Information Report cannot be quashed and hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
13.08.2020
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
SML To
1.The Inspector of Police, Eraniel Police Station, Kanyakumari District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in 3/4 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.17299 of 2016 V.BHARATHIDASAN, J.
SML Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.17299 of 2016 Dated: 13.08.2020 http://www.judis.nic.in 4/4