Crl.R.C.(MD) No.598 of 2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 19.06.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

Crl.R.C.(MD)No.598 of 2023

and

Crl.M.P.(MD)No.8622 of 2023

Manickam

... Petitioner/

Petitioner/

Defacto

Complainant

Vs.

1. Nijam

2. Sadhik

3. Harish

...Respondents/

Respondents/

Accused

4. The Inspector of Police,

Tallakulam Police Station,

Madurai.

(Crime No.2586 of 2020)

...Respondent/

Respondent/

Complainant

Prayer : This Criminal Revision has been filed under Section 397 r/w

401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to allow this criminal revision petition

1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.(MD) No.598 of 2023

setting aside the order dated 01.06.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.5414 of

2022 in C.C.No.456 of 2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate

No.II, Madurai.

For Petitioner

: Mr.S.Balaji

For R4

: Mr.SS.Madhavan,

Government Advocate (Crl. side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Revision is directed against the order passed in

Crl.M.P.No.5414 of 2022 in C.C.No.456 of 2022 dated 01.06.2023 on the

file of the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Madurai, dismissing the petition

filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

2. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the petitioner, FIR came

to be registered in Crime No.2586 of 2020 against 3 persons for the

offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(1) IPC. The fourth

respondent, after completing the investigation, has laid the final report

under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against the same 3 persons for the offences

under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(1) IPC and the same was taken on

file in C.C.No.456 of 2022.

2/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.(MD) No.598 of 2023

3. It is evident from the records that after framing of necessary

charges and when the case stands posted for trial, the petitioner/defacto

complainant has filed the above application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for

adding one Abdul Ahamed as an accused in the above case.

4. The main contention of the petitioner is that the said Abdul

Ahamed is his land-lord, that the said Abdul Ahamed has been taking

steps to forcibly evicting the petitioner with the help of hooligans and

that on 27.12.2020 at 21.50 hours, the said Abdul Ahamed along with

Sathik and Harish, sons of Nijam and one other unknown person came to

the place of the petitioner and attacked him. He would further submit that

when the petitioner was taken to the hospital, he has specifically

mentioned that he was attacked by 5 persons, but the respondent police,

without registering an FIR on the basis of the complaint given by him,

had taken a signature in a blank paper and on that basis, the present FIR

came to be registered.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing

for the fourth respondent would submit that only on the basis of the

3/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.(MD) No.598 of 2023

complaint given by the petitioner, FIR came to be registered and on

proper investigation, the present charge sheet came to be filed against 3

persons, who were all involved in the incident. He would further submit

that the petitioner for the first time has felt out that the said Abdul

Ahamed is the main accused and at his instigation, the above incident

came to be occurred. He would further submit that in the charge sheet as

well as in the documents filed along with the charge sheet, there is

absolutely no mention about the said Abdul Ahamed and the petitioner

has not produced any material to implicate the said Abdul Ahamed.

6. On the basis of the charge sheet and other materials available on

record, the learned Magistrate has also framed the charges and posted the

case for trial. Even the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

admit that as of now there are no material available against the said

Abdul Ahamed before the concerned Court.

7. No doubt, Section 319 Cr.P.C. contemplates that in the course of

any enquiry