IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 01.10.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

Crl.OP.No.20496/2015 & MP.Nos.1 & 2/2015

[Video Conferencing]

K.N.Palaniappan

... Petitioner

Versus

1.The State rep. By

The Inspector of Police,

Veeraiyur Police Station,

Thiruvannamalai District.

2.K.Ezhumalai

... Respondents

Prayer : -

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482

of Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to CC.No.181/2015

on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thiruvannamalai and

quash the same.

For Petitioner

:

Mr.AR.Karthick Lakshmanan

for AL.Ganthimathi

For R1

:

Mr.E.Raj Thilak

Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(1)

Heard Mr.AR.Karthick Lakshmanan, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr.E.Raj Thilak, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

(2)

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C., seeking interference with the further progress in

CC.No.181/2015 now pending on the file of the learned

Judicial Magistrate No.1 at Tiruvannamalai.

(3)

The petitioner is the accused therein.

(4)

A Final Report had been filed pursuant to an investigation

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

by the 1^st respondent/Inspector of Police, Veeriayur Police

Station at Tiruvannamalai, consequent to a complaint given

by the 2^nd respondent herein on 11.02.2015.

(5)

A FIR in Crime No.44/2015 was registered u/s.420 IPC. It

was the complaint of the 2^nd respondent/defacto complainant

that he came over to Chennai to get a registration number

plate for his vehicle and he went over to the shop of the

present petitioner herein and the petitioner stated that he

would provide a high security number plate and also

received a sum of Rs.600/-. It is stated that the

petitioner also gave a number plate with the registration

number and also with the letters ''IND''. The 2^nd

respondent/defacto complainant then realised that such high

security number plates had not been brought into effect by

the Government. Claiming that an act of cheating had been

done, the 2^nd respondent/defacto complainant had given a

complaint to the 1^st

respondent who had thereafter,

registered, as aforesaid, the FIR in Crime No.44/2015

u/s.420 IPC.

(6)

A Final Report had been filed by the 1^st respondent which

had been taken cognizance as CC.No.181/2015 by the learned

Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tiruvannamalai. That Calendar

Case is now sought to be quashed by the petitioner herein.

(7)

As a matter of fact, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1,

had taken cognizance for offences u/s.465, 468 read with

471, 472, 420 IPC. Along with the FIR, the Investigating

Officer had forwarded the statements of witnesses. But he

had not recovered, during the course of investigation, the

number plate which is alleged to have been given by the

petitioner herein to the 2^nd respondent/defacto complainant.

That particular number plate is not found in the list of

documents or in the list of properties annexed to the

charge sheet.

(8)

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the

1^st respondent stated that the said number plate had

actually been seized, but there is no record for the same.

(9)

It is also seen that quite apart from the 2^nd

respondent/defacto complainant, no other witness speak

directly about that particular incident of sales of number

plate by the petitioner herein to the 2^nd respondent/defacto

complainant.

(10) It is complained by the learned counsel for the petitioner

that the entire Final Report is based on premises and no

proper investigation has been done. The Investigating

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Officer, during the course of investigation, had also

prepared a Mahazar giving the sketch, viz., the place where

the shop of the petitioner herein is situated. That would

hardly help the case of the prosecution because the case of

the prosecution