Madras High Court
Murugan vs State Through on 6 November, 2025
Author: A.D.Jagadish Chandira
Bench: A.D.Jagadish Chandira
Crl.O.P.(MD). No.14191 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.11.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
Crl.O.P.(MD). No.14191 of 2025
and Crl.M.P.(MD).No.11423 of 2025
Murugan ... Petitioner
Vs.
State through,
1. The Inspector of Police,
Kenikkarai Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District.
(Crime No.190 of 2024)
2. Baskaran
District Co-ordinator,
Co-ordinator (SSA),
Flying Squad ‘A3’ team,
Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita/Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 08:20:40 pm )
Crl.O.P.(MD). No.14191 of 2025
records relating to the First Information Report in Crime No.190 of 2024
dated 12.04.2024 on the file of the first respondent Police and quash the
same as against the petitioner concerned.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sathishkumar
For Respondents : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.190 of 2024, on the file of the first respondent Police.
2. The submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner are as follows:-
2.1. The case in Crime No.190 of 2024 was registered on 12.04.2024 against the petitioner and others for the offences under Sections 143, 283 & 291 of IPC, alleging that on 10.04.2025, by violating the rules, the petitioner and the other accused had organised an election campaign, causing traffic congestion and disturbance to the public. 2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 08:20:40 pm ) Crl.O.P.(MD). No.14191 of 2025 2.2. The maximum punishment prescribed for the offence under Section 143 IPC may extend to six months, for the offence under Section 283 IPC, the punishment is a fine which may extend to Rs.200/- and for the offence under Section 291 IPC, the maximum punishment may extend to six months. Hence, the investigation ought to have been completed and the final report filed within one year from the date of registration of the FIR, as mandated under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Therefore, there is a bar for taking cognizance if it is filed beyond one year.
2.3. Since the final report was filed after the expiry of one year, the learned Magistrate is barred from taking cognizance. Hence, the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner is an abuse of process of law and is liable to be quashed.
2.4. In support of his contention, the learned counsel relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sarah Mathew vs. Institute of Cardio Vascular Diseases by its Director Dr.K.M.Cheran and others, reported in (2014) 2 SCC 62.
3/7https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 08:20:40 pm ) Crl.O.P.(MD). No.14191 of 2025
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Police submitted that the investigation in this case has been completed and the charge sheet has been filed through e-filing before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Ramanathapuram, on 26.08.2025. He fairly admitted that there is a delay.
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and upon perusal of the materials available on record, this Court finds that the case was registered for the offences under Sections 143, 283 & 291 of IPC and that for the said offences, the charge sheet ought to have been filed within one year from the date of registration of the FIR as mandated under Section 468(1)(2)(b) of Cr.P.C. However, the final report has been filed only after a period of one year and therefore, cognizance cannot be taken.
5. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that no 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 08:20:40 pm ) Crl.O.P.(MD). No.14191 of 2025 useful purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings pending. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the proceedings pending against the petitioner pursuant to Crime No.190 of 2024, on the file of the first respondent Police, are hereby quashed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
06.11.2025 ham Neutral Citation: Yes/No To
1. The Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ramanathapuram.
2. The Inspector of Police, Kenikkarai Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 08:20:40 pm ) Crl.O.P.(MD). No.14191 of 2025 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
ham Crl.O.P.(MD). No.14191 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.(MD).No.11423 of 2025 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 08:20:40 pm ) Crl.O.P.(MD). No.14191 of 2025 06.11.2025 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 08:20:40 pm )