Madras High Court
Abbas vs A.Bakeer Mohammed on 27 August, 2020
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
CRL.O.P.No.50 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.08.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRL.O.P.No.50 of 2020 and
Crl.MP.Nos.36 & 38 of 2020
1.Abbas
2.Alima Beevi
3.S.Jasima Banu ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.A.Bakeer Mohammed
2.The State rep by
The Inspector of Police,
Karungalpalayam Police Station
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Erode District,
Erode ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
praying to call for the records in CC.No.539 of 2019 on the file of the learned
Judicial Magistrate No.I, Erode and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Shase
For Respondents
For R1 : Mr.M.Karthik,
for Mr.I.C.Vasudevan
For R2 & 3 : Mr.S.Karthikeyan,
Additional Public Prosecutor
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/8
CRL.O.P.No.50 of 2020
ORDER
This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in CC.No.539 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Erode.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are A2 to A4. The third petitioner is the wife of the first accused and the petitioners 1 and 2 are his in-laws. The first respondent herein is none other the father of the first accused. He lodged complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. and the same has been taken cognizance by the learned Magistrate in CC.No.539 of 2019 for the offences under Sections 120(b), 356, 379, 307, 381, 341, 363, 149, 150 and 323 of IPC as against the accused persons. He further submitted that already the first respondent lodged complaint before the Inspector of Police, Karungalpalayam Police Station and the same was registered in Cr.No.277 of 2018 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 342 and 506(ii) of IPC and it is pending for investigation. For the very same occurrence and also on some more allegations, the present impugned complaint has been lodged as against the petitioners. The entire complaint is manifested with malafide intention and no offence is made out as against the http://www.judis.nic.in 2/8 CRL.O.P.No.50 of 2020 petitioners herein. Further, he submitted that even as per the complaint lodged by the first respondent, there is no specific allegation as against the petitioners and all the allegations are bald and vague and as such the learned Magistrate ought not to have taken cognizance as against the petitioners. There is absolutely no sufficient ground to proceed as against the petitioners and even then the learned Magistrate mechanically issued summons without even applying his mind to the petitioners. Therefore, he sought for quashment of the entire proceedings.
3. Per contra, the learned counsel for the first respondent would submit that the first respondent's son got married with the third petitioner and immediately after marriage, the first accused demanded huge money from the first respondent for starting new business. The first respondent also paid a sum of Rs.36 lakhs to the first accused. Again, the first respondent was abducted by the first accused and forcibly obtained signature in the blank papers, in which the petitioners have supported the first accused and also induced him to demand money from the first respondent herein. As far as the FIR in Cr.No.277 of 2018 is concerned, it was registered for the occurrence took place on 01.06.2018 and insofar as the private complaint is concerned, http://www.judis.nic.in 3/8 CRL.O.P.No.50 of 2020 completely on different set of allegations as against all the accused persons. After recording sworn statement, the learned Magistrate rightly had taken cognizance and issued summons to the petitioners. He further submitted that all the points raised by the petitioners have to be considered only before the trial court during the trial by let in evidence. Therefore, he prayed for dismissal of the quash petition.
4. Heard Mr.M.Guruprasad, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.M.Karthik, learned counsel for the first respondent.
5. There are totally six accused, in which the petitioners are arrayed as A2 to A4. The first accused got married with the third petitioner herein. Thereafter there was a strained relationship between the first accused and the first respondent. In respect of demanding money and also with the allegations that the first accused abducted the first respondent and obtained signatures in the blank papers, on the said allegation, the first respondent already lodged complaint and the same was registered by the Inspector of Police, Karungalpalayam Police Station in Cr.No.277 of 2018 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 342 and 506(ii) of IPC as against two named http://www.judis.nic.in 4/8 CRL.O.P.No.50 of 2020 accused persons and four unnamed accused persons. Though the petitioners are not accused in Cr.No.277 of 2018, on perusal of the present impugned complaint, for the very same allegations, the first respondent also impleaded the petitioners as accused 2 to 4. The first respondent also improvised the allegations alleging that only on the instigation of the petitioners, the first accused demanded huge money from the defacto complainant. On such demand and harassment, the first respondent had given a sum of Rs.36 lakhs to the first accused. All along, the first respondent alleged allegation only as against the first accused, namely the son of the first respondent herein. Insofar as the petitioners are concerned, they have been impleaded as accused with the allegation that only on their inducement, the first accused demanded huge money from the first respondent and also abducted the first respondent and obtained signatures in the blank papers. On careful verification of the complaint, it is seen that there is no specific allegation as against the petitioners and they have been alleged to have committed offences under Section 120(b) of IPC and committed other offences by the first accused.
6. On instruction, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that in respect of Cr.No.277 of 2018 on the file of the Inspector of http://www.judis.nic.in 5/8 CRL.O.P.No.50 of 2020 Police, Karungalpalayam Police Station, Erode District, it reveals that the investigation is pending and the Inspector of Police, Karungalpalayam are yet to file final report. Therefore, for the very same occurrence, the present private complaint has been lodged by the first respondent and the learned Magistrate without verifying the complaint and allegations and also without any material to attract any offence as against the petitioners, mechanically issued summons to the petitioners. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioners would rely upon the judgment rendered in the case of S.W.Palanitkar and others Vs. State of Bihar and others reported in (2002) 1 SCC 241, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India categorically held that the trial court Magistrate has to apply his mind and has to scrutinise the evidence brought on record and may put questions to the complainant and his witnesses and elicit answers to find out the truthfulness of the allegations or otherwise and then examine if any offence is prima facie committed by all or any of the accused.
7. In the case on hand, on perusal of the entire complaint, there is absolutely no specific allegation as against the petitioners to attract any of the offences as taken cognizance by the trial court and as such the entire complaint is nothing but clear abuse of process of court. Hence, the petitioners need not http://www.judis.nic.in 6/8 CRL.O.P.No.50 of 2020 go for ordeal of the trial and the complaint itself cannot be sustained as against the petitioners.
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed, and the proceedings in CC.No.539 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Erode is quashed as against the petitioners alone. However, the trial court is directed to proceed with the trial as against the remaining accused persons and complete the same within a period of twelve months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
27.08.2020 Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No lok http://www.judis.nic.in 7/8 CRL.O.P.No.50 of 2020 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
lok To
1.The learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Erode
2. The Superintendent of Police, Erode District, Erode
3.The Inspector of Police, Karungalpalayam Police Station Erode CRL.O.P.No.50 of 2020 27.08.2020 http://www.judis.nic.in 8/8