Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 78976
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J
State Rep. by Sub-Inspector of Police, Kuvagam Police Station, Ariyalur – Appellant
Versus
Tamilmaravan – Respondent
Suo Motu TR.No.404 of 2025 | S.T.C.No.292 of 2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Mr.J.Subbiah Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For the Respondents:
The right to a speedy trial may necessitate quashing pending charges if significant delays impede fair justice.
Headnote:The case involves an alleged offence under Section 4B of the TN Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act 1959 relating to a banner placed near a temple leading to a registered crime. The court found that delays in serving summons on the first accused, who is abroad, would compromise the right to a speedy trial. Consequently, the court quashed the proceedings in S.T.C.No.292 of 2022 and disposed of the transfer case. The court's determination centered on the necessity of addressing the speedy trial rights of the accused, emphasizing the lack of useful purpose in continuing the case amidst such delays. The proceedings are quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. delay affects the right to speedy trial. (Para 1) |
| 2. court quashes proceedings due to unnecessary delays. (Para 2) |
ORDER
The allegation in this case is that on 07.06.2019, at a place near the Amman Koil, a banner was kept by the accused and hence, a case was registered in Crime No.55 of 2019 on 07.06.2019 for the alleged offence under Section 4B of the TN Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959. Now, the Final Report was taken on file and the case is pending from the year 2019 onwards. While the second accused is regularly attending, NBW warrant is pending against the first accused. It can be seen that right from the year 2022, summons were not served on the first accused also. It is stated by the prosecution itself that the first accused in abroad eking out his livelihood. Considering all these cases, even if summons are served and the accused are brought for facing trial, considering the nature of allegations, the delay would itself would impinge the right of speedy trial of the accused. In view thereof, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the case pending.
2. Accordingly, the case in S.T.C.No..292 of 2022 on the file of the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Senthurai Taluk, Ariyalur, stands quashed. This Suo Motu Transfer Case is disposed of.
21.08.2025 grs Note to the Trial Court: This order is digitally signed and communicated electronically alone. The Trial Court shall take note of the order and accordingly classify the case pending before them as allowed / dismissed / disposed of, etc, and while doing so, consider any applications such as disposal of properties, etc., and pass appropriate orders, as may be necessary. Further, the Court below is directed to dispatch the copy of this order to all concerned.
