Vijayatharani vs / on 24 April, 2019

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Vijayatharani vs / on 24 April, 2019

Bench: N.Seshasayee

                                                        1

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                              DATED: 24.04.2019

                                                    CORAM:

                             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

                                       Crl.O.P.[MD]No.5874 of 2019
                                                   and
                                  Crl.M.P.(MD)No.3784 and 3785 of 2019

                      Vijayatharani                                         : Petitioner
                                                      /Vs./

                      1.The Inspector of Police,
                        Marthandam Police Station,
                        Kanyakumari District.
                        Crime No.503 / 2015

                      2.S.Sivaprasad                                        : Respondents
                      PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of
                      Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to the proceedings in
                      P.R.C.No.3 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate
                      No.I, Kuzhithurai and may quash the same in respect of the
                      petitioner / A3.


                                  For Petitioner     : Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar
                                  For Respondent     : Mr.A.P.G.Ohm Chairma Prabhu
                                                      Government Advocate (Crl.Side)


                                                     ORDER

The present petition is filed to quash the final report in Crime No.503 of 2015 implicating the petitioner for the offence under http://www.judis.nic.in 2 Section 120 (b) IPC r/w 3(i) TNPPDL Act now pending in P.R.C.No.3 of 2019.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there are three accused in this case of whom only A1 and A2 were named in the FIR. The allegation was that they pelted stones in the State Transport buses and the present petitioner was roped in only in the final report as instigating the said crime. The learned counsel added that nowhere the witnesses have spoken about the prsence of the petitioner or any overtact involved in the occurrence.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner was roped only based on the confession made by A1 and A2 to the Investigating Officer in the course of investigation.

4. There are two facts, which this Court requires to consider:-

(a) That dehors A1 and A2 none of the witnesses have spoken about the physical presence of the accused or to any overt act attributing of offence under Section 109 or 120 (b) Cr.P.C.,

(b) That a mere confession of co-accused given to the police in the course of investigation is the only incriminating material made available to implicate the petitioner.

http://www.judis.nic.in 3

5. Law is clear that confession given to the police official in the course of investigation has zero evidenciary value. Even otherwise, if a statement of co-accused has to be relied, then it is advisable to look for independent corroboration, and that is missing too. Therefore, this Court finds merit in the petition. Accordingly, it is allowed and final report laid in Crime No.503 of 2015 is quashed only as regards the petitioner. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

24.04.2019 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No ta To

1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Marthandam Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

http://www.judis.nic.in 4 N.SESHASAYEE, J., ta Crl.O.P.[MD]No.5874 of 2019 24.04.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court