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

MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
A.MohammedNasir – Appellant
Versus
A.MydeenPillai – Respondent
CRL RC(MD) 383 2023



CRL.R.C.(MD).No.383 of 2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Reserved on : 11.04.2023

Delivered on : 05.06.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

CRL.R.C.(MD).No.383 of 2023

A.Mohammed Nasir

: Petitioner

Vs.

1.A.Mydeen Pillai

2.Mohammed Mustafa

3.Abdul Rashik

4.Dharik Mohammed

5.Vasheer Mohammed

6.The Inspector of Police,

Boothapandy Police Station,

Kanniyakumari District.

: Respondents

(R6 is suo-motu impleaded as per order of the Court, dated 02.02.2023 in

Crl.M.P.(MD)No.1827/2023 in Crl.R.C(MD)No.SR16639/2018)

PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition has been filed under Section 397(1)

r/w 401 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records in pursuance of the order passed by

the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Boothapandi in

C.M.P.No.6203 of 2016, dated 01.02.2018 and set aside the same.

For Petitioner

: Mr.V.Kathirvelu, Senior Counsel,

for Mr.C.M.Mari Chellaiah Prabhu

1/19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRL.R.C.(MD).No.383 of 2023

For R1

: Mr.R.Anand,

for Mr.R.Ponkarthikeyan,

For R2 to R5

: No Appearance

For R6

: Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram,

Additional Public Prosecutor.

ORDER

The Criminal Revision is directed against the order passed in

C.M.P.No.6203 of 2016, dated 01.02.2018 on the file of the learned District

Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Boothapandi, dismissing the private

complaint.

2.The petitioner/defacto complainant, by alleging that the complaint

to the jurisdictional Police was not registered and his complaints to the

Police Higher Officials were of no avail, has filed a private complaint under

Section 200 Cr.P.C and the same was taken on file as C.M.P.No.6203 of

2016 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,

Boothapandi. Subsequently, on the basis of the complaint lodged by the

petitioner/defacto complainant, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.9 of

2017 on 10.01.2017 against the respondents 1 to 5 for the alleged offences

under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 120(B) IPC.

2/19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRL.R.C.(MD).No.383 of 2023

3. The 6th respondent, after completing the investigation, has filed a

negative report on 27.06.2017 before the jurisdictional Court and the

learned Magistrate, after receipt of the final report, has issued RCS notice

to the petitioner/complainant. The petitioner/complainant, after receipt of

the said RCS notice, has entered into appearance and filed his objections.

The learned Magistrate has conducted enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C in

the pending C.M.P.No.6203 of 2016 by recording the statements of the

witnesses produced by the petitioner/complainant. Since the private

complaint under C.M.P.No.6203 of 2016 and the negative report in

RCS.No.20 of 2017 were pending with respect to the same complaint, the

learned Judicial Magistrate, upon considering the materials available on

record and on hearing the arguments of both the sides, has passed the

impugned common order, accepting the final report in RCS.No.20 of 2017

and thereby closing the FIR in Crime No.9 of 2017 as mistake of fact and

dismissed the private complaint in C.M.P.No.6203 of 2016 under Section

203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the

private complaint in C.M.P.No.6203 of 2016, the defacto complainant has

preferred the present Criminal Revision.

3/19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRL.R.C.(MD).No.383 of 2023

4. The case of the complainant is that he is a member of Uduman

Lebhai Sahib Mosque Trust (ULSMT), that the Mosque owned by the said

trust was managed by the USLMT trustees; that the said trust had created

the scheme in O.S.No.55 of 1096 in the year 1992; that the said suit is still

pending on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil; that the

Muttavalli Mydeen Plaintiff/first respondent herein/first accused has

misappropriated funds of USLMT and also misused his po

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