IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.11.2025 CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA P.Periyasamy, Deputy Superintendent of Police, DCB, Theni District.

Residence at 39, 40-7, Perual Kovil Street, Pappanaickenpalayam, Coimbatore – 641 037. ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep. by Inspector of Police, Saibaba Colony Police Station, Coimbatore District.

(Crime NO.1024/2017) ..Respondent Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita/Section 482 Cr.P.C. to call for the records relating to the adverse remarks passed against the petitioner by the V Additional Sessions Judge, Coimbatore at paragraph no.15 of the judgment in S.C.No.154 of 2018 dated 31.07.2025 and expunge the same.

For petitioner : Mr.C.Iyyaparaj for Mr.M.D.Ilayaraja For respondent : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Addl.Public Prosectuor

O R D E R

This criminal original petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the adverse remarks passed against the petitioner by the V Additional Sessions Judge, Coimbatore (for brevity “the Trial Court”) at paragraph no.15 of the judgment dated 31.07.2025 in S.C.No.154 of 2018 and expunge the same.

Brief facts:

2.1 On 16.10.2017, P.W.1, father of one Rukshana, gave a complaint stating that his daughter who had gone out, did not return home. Based on the said complaint, Anbarasan (P.W.23), Station House Officer, registered a case in C.S.R.No.297 of 2017 on 19.10.2017. Thereafter, on 22.10.2017, an FIR in Crime No.1024 of 2017 was registered under the caption “woman missing” and one Saravanan (P.W.25) was appointed as the Investigating Officer.

2.2 During the course of investigation, on 23.10.2017, one Prasad, surrendered and confessed having committed the murder of Rukshana. Saravanan (P.W.25) recorded the confession of the said Prasad and thereafter, altered the case to one under Sections 302 and 201 IPC, on the same day. While the investigation was going on, Saravanan (P.W.25) was transferred to some other station and thereafter, the petitioner continued with the investigation and after conducting scientific investigation and collecting materials, filed a final report on 11.11.2018 for the offences under Sections 302, 201, 364 and 404 IPC before the Magistrate concerned, pursuant to which, the case was committed to the Court of Session, Coimbatore and made over to the Trial Court.

2.3 The Trial Court, after hearing the accused, framed charges against the accused for the offences under Sections 302, 201, 364 and 404 IPC. After a full fledged trial, the Trial Court found the accused guilty of the offences under Sections 302, 364 and 201 IPC, but, acquitted him of the charge under Section 404 IPC.

2.4 The Trial Court, finding that the acquittal of the accused of the charge under Section 404 IPC was on account of lapses in the investigation by Saravanan (P.W.25) and the petitioner, made adverse remarks about them at paragraph 15 of the judgment and also directed the superior officials to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and Saravanan (P.W.25). Seeking to expunge the said adverse remarks, the present criminal original petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is P.W.12.

3. Mr.C.Iyyapparaj, learned counsel representing Mr.M.D.Ilayaraja, learned counsel on record for the petitioner, would submit that the Trial Court, based on the final report, found the accused guilty of the offences under Sections 302, 201 and 364 IPC; however, finding that there were no materials to convict the accused for the offence under Section 404 IPC, acquitted him of the said charge; however, the Trial Court, without giving an opportunity to the petitioner and the I.O. viz., Saravanan (P.W.25), who had conducted investigation, passed adverse remarks and had also recommended to the Commissioner of Police to initiate disciplinary proceedings against them; it is a settled law that if any acquittal is due to a result of a defective investigation, a finding can be recorded to the eff