1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Date: 11/04/2022

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN

Crl.OP(MD)No.19642 of 2018

and

Crl.MP(MD)No.8959 of 2018

1.Abraham Selvam

2.Vinoth

3.Karneesh :Petitioners/A1 to A3

Vs.

1.The Sub Inspector of Police,

Vadasery Police Station,

Kannyakumari District,

(Crime No.720 of 2017) : R1/Complainant

2.Kumaresan : R2/De-facto Complainant

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under section

482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in CC

No.112 of 2018 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II,

Nagercoil and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar

For 1^st Respondent : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy

Government Advocate

(Criminal side)

For 2^nd Respondent : No appearance

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking quashment of CC No.112 of

2018 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II,

Nagercoil.

2.The case of the prosecution in brief:-

On 09/12/2007 at about 7.00 pm, the de-facto complainant police

team was on their petrol duty, finding that the accused person is

wanted in connection with a case in Crime No.719 of 2017 for the

offences under sections 394(b), 353 and 506(i) IPC, try to arrest

him and also asked him to come to the police station for enquiry.

But the first accused refused to come and he tried to start the two

wheeler and at that time, the other accused persons abused the de-

facto complainant in filthy language and preventing from discharging

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

2

his official duty. Based upon the complaint given by the de-fact

complainant, a case in Crime No.720 of 2017 has been registered for

the offences under section 294(b), 341, 353 and 506(i) IPC and after

completing the formalities of investigation, final report was filed

and it was taken cognizance in CC No.112 of 2018 by the Judicial

Magistrate No.II, Nagercoil.

3.Seeking quashment of the same, this petition has been filed.

4.Heard both sides.

5.This petition has been filed solely on the ground that the

earlier petition filed by the co-accused by name Rex Parimala, who

was the 4^th accused, proceedings have been quashed by this court in

Crl.OP(MD)No.16530 of 2018 and the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners would submit that the petitioners are standing in the

very same footing and so, they must also be discharged from the

criminal prosecution. Only on that ground, interim stay was granted

by this court, by order, dated 08/11/2018. But however, final report

stated to be presented before the concerned court, on 17/06/2018 and

subsequently, it was taken on file on 12/08/2018, noting that there

was an order interim stay. So the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners was permitted to argue the matter on merits.

6.Now let us go back to the allegations. It is a specific case

of the prosecution that when the police team about to direct the

accused Abraham Selvam to attend the enquiry in connection with the

case in Crime No.719 of 2017, he refused and the other co-accused

also joined in that attempt of committing the offences. The above

said 4^th accused, as mentioned earlier, is also standing on the very

same footing, that of A2 and A3. But the allegation against the the

petitioners is entirely different. So in the facts and circumstances

of the case, the police team intercepted A1 for the purpose of

making the enquiry and in the above said crime, which was registered

for the offences stated above. That case was also registered against

A1 for having prevented the police officer while serving summons,

since A1 stated to be connected with enquiry in CSR No.757 of 2017.

So in that petition enquiry also, Rajappan Abraham Selvam, Vinoth

and Karneesh were involved, who are the accused in this crime also.

So again the date of occurrence is stated to be o