##PAGE1##

Crl.O.P.No.10791 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30.03.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

Crl.O.P.No.10791 of 2023 and Crl.MP.Nos.6818 & 6820 of 2023

1.CHINNAMANI 2.MARIMUTHU

3.CHITRA

4.VAITHEESHWARI 5.SUBRAMANIYAN

6.SARATHAM ... Petitioners

Vs.

1.The STATE REP BY the INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KEELAPALUR POLICE STATION,

ARIYALUR. (CR.NO. 293/2022)

2.R.MARIYAPPAN .. Respondents

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in CC.No.53 of 2023 pending on the file of the learned

Judicial Magistrate No. II, Ariyalur and quash the same

For Petitioners : Mr.V.S.Senthilkumar For Respondents

For R1 : Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

For R2 : Mr.N.Elayaraja Page 1 of 10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2026 01:38:13 pm )

Crl.O.P.No.10791 of 2023

ORDER

This criminal original petition has been filed to quash the

proceedings in CC.No.53 of 2023 pending on the file of the learned Judicial

Magistrate No. II, Ariyalur.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant and

the accused persons are adjacent land owners and on 20.12.2022 at about 12.00 in the noon, the accused persons destroyed the fence of the de-facto complainant thereby causing loss to the tune of Rs.50,000/- and subsequently on the very same day at about 8.30 pm, when the de-facto complainant went to the house of the accused persons to question them, the accused persons abused the de-facto complainant with filthy languages and threatened the de-facto complainant with dire consequences. Being aggrieved with the same, the de-facto complainant had preferred a complaint dated 22.12.2022 to the respondent police and the respondent police registered F.I.R in Cr. No. 293 of 2022 for the offences under section 147, 447, 427, 294 [b] & 506 [ii] I.P.C and upon investigation, the respondent police filed a final report and the Learned Judicial Magistrate No. II, Ariyalur was pleased to take cognizance in C.C No. 53 of 2023 for the

Page 2 of 10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2026 01:38:13 pm )

Crl.O.P.No.10791 of 2023 offences under sectiond 147, 447, 427, 294 [b] & 506 [ii] I.P.C. Aggrieved

with the same, the petitioners have preferred this criminal original petition.

3. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on either side and perused

the materials placed on record.

4. On perusal of the entire records and also the statements

recorded from the witnesses, it is revealed that the allegations are trivial in nature and there is a property dispute between the petitioners and the second respondent. Further, there are no specific averments and allegations to attract

Sections 294(b) and 506 Part II of IPC.

5. To attract the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC, there must

be an uttering of words in or near any public place to affect the person. In

this regard it is relevant to extract Section 294(b) of IPC, as follows:-

"294. Obscene acts and songs —Whoever, to the annoyance of others—

(b) sings, recites or utters any obscene song, ballad or words, in or near any public place, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which

may extend to three months, or with fine, or with both."

Page 3 of 10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2026 01:38:13 pm )

Crl.O.P.No.10791 of 2023

6. Admittedly, there is absolutely no words uttered by the

petitioners in a public place as such to constitute the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC, there are no averments and allegations. It is relevant to rely upon the judgment reported in “Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana),

(1996) 4 SCC 17”wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had held thus:—

“9. In order to secure a conviction, the provision requires two particulars to be proved by the prosecution, i.e. (i) the offender has done any obscene act in any public place or has sung, recited or uttered any obscene songs or words in or near any public place; and (ii) has so caused annoy