CRL.R.C.(MD) No.538 of 2017

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

RESERVED ON : 19.04.2021

DELIVERED ON : 20.09.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP

CRL.R.C.(MD) No.538 of 2017

and

CRL.M.P.(MD)No.6035 of 2017

Rajasingh

: Petitioner

Vs.

1.The State,

represented by Sub-Inspector of Police,

Sivakasi Town Police Station,

Virudhunagar District.

(Cr.No.404 of 2008)

2.Raghavan

3.Mohankumar

: Respondents

PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 Cr.P.C.

r/w. Section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records

in Crl.M.P.No.10908 of 2016, dated 02.03.2017 in C.C.No.99 of 2008

on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar

District and set aside the same as illegal.

For Petitioner

: Mr.Veerakathiravan

Senior Counsel

for Mr.M.Solaisamy

For R1

: Mr.A.P.G.Ohm Chairma Prabhu,

Government Advocate (crl.side)

For R2

:Mr.S.Muthukumar

For R3

:Mr.S.Ramasamy

ORDER

This revision is filed as against the judgment in

Cr.M.P.No.10908 of 2016, in C.C.No.99 of 2008, dated 02.03.2017 by

the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.

2.Heard Mr.Veera Kathiravan, learned Senior Counsel for

Mr.M.Solaisamy, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr.A.P.G.Ohm

Chairma Prabhu, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for

the first respondent, Mr.S.Muthu Kumar, learned Counsel for the

second respondent and Mr.S.Ramasamy, learned Counsel for the third

respondent.

3.The facts relevant to the case in brief are as follows:

3.1.The third respondent/de-facto complainant, believing the

workds of the advertisement of the Bell Hotel Management, admitted

1/9

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

CRL.R.C.(MD) No.538 of 2017

his son aged about nine old in the swimming coaching. On 01.05.2008,

the third respondent/de-facto complainant left his child in the

swimming pool and watched what was happening there. At that time,

the coach asked the third respondent/de-facto complainant to wait

outside the pool stating that they would be responsible for all the

incidents. After some time, the petitioner heard the noise from the

pool and the third respondent/de-facto complainant went inside and

saw the incident that his son was rescued from the water.

Immediately, the son of the third respondent/de-facto complainant

was taken to hospital and there, it was declared that his son had

already stopped his last breathe. Thereafter, the third

respondent/de-facto complainant lodged a complaint before the

Sivakasi Town Police Station and the same was registered in Crime

No.404 of 2008 only against the coach, who is the in-charge of the

swimming coaching. Aggrieved by the registration of FIR, leaving

the Management of Bell Hotel, the third respondent/de-facto

complainant filed a petition before this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)

No.6563 of 2008 seeking to include the Bell Hotel Management in the

case. This Court by order dated 16.07.2009 disposed the case with

an observation that the petitioner therein/third respondent herein

to move before the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned during the

course of examination of witnesses, for further investigation or to

include any other person as accused for the offence made out by

them. Accordingly, the third respondent/de-facto complainant filed a

petition under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. in Cr.M.P.No.10908 of 2016 in

C.C.No.99 of 2008 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sivakasi,

seeking to array the Managing Director of Bell Hotel, viz., Mr.Raja

Singh, S/o.Chelladurai, as accused in the case. After hearing both

sides and based on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the

learned Judicial Magistrate, Sivakasi, came to the conclusion that

the petition filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. has to be allowed in

the interest of justice and accordingly, allowed the petition

directing to include the Managing Director of Bell H