Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1300 of 2019

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

RESERVED ON : 14.12.2021

PRONOUNCED ON: 25.01.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1300 of 2019

and

Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.639 and 640 of 2019

1.Karthi

2.Vinith

3.Praveenkumar

4.Parthiban

5.M.Perumu

6.Selvam

: Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 6

Vs.

State represented by

1.The Inspector of Police,

Batlagundu Police Station,

Dindigul District.

(Cr.No.368 of 2015)

: 1^st Respondent / Complainant

2. Ganeshkumar

Village Administrative Officer,

Batlagundu,

Dindigul District.

: 2^nd Respondent/Defacto complainant

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482

Cr.P.C, to call for the records relating to C.C.No.198 of 2016, on

the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Nilakkottai and quash the same

as against the petitioners.

For Petitioners

: Mr.M.Karunanithi

For Respondents

: Mr.R.Sivakumar

Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

for R.1

: No Appearance for R.2

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking

Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking orders to call for the records

pertaining to the case in C.C.No.198 of 2016, on the file of the

Judicial Magistrate, Nilakkottai and quash the same.

1/6

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

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1300 of 2019

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 6 in C.C.No.198 of

2016, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court,

Nilakkottai. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the Village

Administrative Officer of Batlagundu, Dindigul District, second

respondent herein, F.I.R., came to be registered in Cr.No.368 of 205

against the present petitioners for the alleged offences under

Sections 290, 291, 186, 187, 188 I.P.C., r/w 192(A), 158, 177 of the

Motor Vehicles Act and Rule 21(10) of the Motor Vehicles Rules. The

first respondent, after completing the investigation, has laid a

final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., dated 26.10.2015 against the

petitioners for the alleged offences under Sections 290, 291, 186,

188 I.P.C., r/w 192(A), 158, 177 of the Motor Vehicles Act and Rule

21(10) of the Motor Vehicles Rules and that the case was taken on

file in C.C.No.198 of 2016 and the same is pending on the file of

the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Nilakkottai.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 18.09.2015 at about

15.40 hours, in Batlagundu main road and in front of Meenakshibavan

Hotel, when the Vinayagar Idol procession was proceeding, the fourth

accused had taken a tractor bearing Registration No.TN-20-2019 by

loading Vinayagar Idols and also allowed the other accused to travel

in the said goods vehicle, that they had also arranged mike set and

loud speaker and played songs with high volume and thereby caused

nuisance to the public, that they had violated the directions issued

by the Police and Revenue Department and also by the Madurai Bench

of Madras High Court and that they have also used the tractor

without any permission and without any valid documents.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that

the learned Judicial Magistrate ought not to have taken cognizance

on the basis of the final report, as he was barred from taking

cognizance except on a complaint in writing by the public servant

concerned or some other public servant to whom he is

administratively subordinate under Section 195 Cr.P.C., for the

offences under Sections 172 to 188 I.P.C., and that therefore, the

cognizance taken on the final report filed by the first respondent

is illegal.

5. At this juncture, it is necessary to refer the judgment of

the Honourable Supreme Court in C. Muniappan & Ors vs State Of Tamil

Nadu in CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 127-130 OF 2008, dated 30.08.2010 and

the relevant passages are extracted hereunder:

“20. Section 195(a)(i) Cr.PC bars the court from taking

cognizance of any offence punishable under Section