SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 39246

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J
Benish @ Sahaya Antony Benish – Appellant
Versus
State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Sub Inspector Of Police, Eathamozhy Police Station Kanyakumari District – Respondent
Crl.OP.(MD)No.6520 of 2026|Crl.M.P.(MD).Nos.7067 & 7068 of 2026



Advocates:
For Petitioner: M/s.Ananth
For Respondent No.1: Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor

Absence of recovered weapon or size details not ground to quash charge sheet under S.324 IPC; raised at trial.

Headnote:The petition under Section 528 of BNSS Act seeks to quash the charge sheet in C.C. No. 413 of 2023 for offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) IPC, alleging attack with a stone causing simple injury to lips. Court examined charge sheet lacking recovery or details of stone's size/sharpness for Section 324 IPC. Court held contention on absence of weapon details not ground for quashing. Issue framed: Whether Section 324 IPC applicable without recovered weapon or specified size/sharpness. Ratio: Such technical objections to be raised at trial, not for pre-trial quashing of charge sheet. Petition dismissed with direction for expeditious disposal of C.C. No. 413 of 2023 by 31.07.2026; personal appearance of petitioner dispensed considering employment on ship.

Table of Content
1. alleged stone attack causing simple lip injury. (Para 2)
2. s.324 ipc not quashable without weapon recovery details. (Para 4 , 6)
3. materials perused; arguments heard. (Para 5)

ORDER

The present petition has been filed by the 2nd accused in C.C.No.413 of

2023 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.III, Nagercoil, seeking to quash the charge sheet, wherein, petitioner is charged with offences punishable under sections 341,294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) of IPC.

2. A perusal of the charge sheet reveals that the petitioner is alleged to have attacked the defacto complainant with a stone and caused a simple injury to the lips of the de facto complainant.

3. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Section

324 IPC is not made out, and he submits that, in the absence of recovery of the alleged weapon (stone), the invocation of Section 324 IPC can be justified only upon considering the size and sharpness of the stone.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent would submit that the issue raised by the petitioner is a matter for trial and it cannot be a ground for quashing the charge sheet.

5. Heard learned Counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. The primary contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that, since the stone has not been recovered and the size and sharpness of the stone have not been specified in the charge sheet and hence, Section 324 IPC is not made out. However, this Court is of the considered opinion that such a contention can be raised only during trial and it cannot be a ground for quashing the charge sheet. Therefore, this Court is inclined to dismiss the present Criminal Original Petition.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

However, there shall be a direction to the learned Judicial Magistrate No. III, Nagercoil, to expeditiously dispose of C.C. No.413 of 2023 on or before

31.07.2026. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top