High Court · 2025

Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 11.03.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANCrl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024and Crl.M.P.No.5285 & 5287 of 2024T.Pathmanaban... PetitionerVs.1. The State Rep byThe Inspector of Police,K1, Sembium Police Station,Pulianthope, Chennai.2. Sridhar... RespondentsPRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to call for the records of the case pending in S.C.No.56 of 2024 before the learned V Additional Sessions Court at Chennai and quash the same.For Petitioner: Mr.A.Natarajan, Senior Counsel For Ms.A.MadhumathiFor RespondentsFor R1: Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)Page 1 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024O R D E RThis Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.56 of 2024 on the file of the learned V Additional Sessions Court, Chennai, as against the petitioner.2.The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, the first respondent registered a FIR in Crime No.391 of 2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 489(C) and 489(E) of IPC, alleging that on 20.03.2021, when the second respondent went to purchase vegetable at a Super Market run by the petitioner in the name of Perambur Kaai Kani Super Ankadi, located at No.28, Bharathi Street, Perambur, Chennai and after purchasing the vegetables, he had paid the bill amount by way of cash. When he expected balance amount, the staff of the shop issued dummy currency i.e., three five rupee dummy currencies and three one rupee plastic coins. When the second respondent insisted for Indian currency, the staff of the shop threatened him and scolded him with filthy language. After completion of investigation, the respondent filed final report and the same has been taken cognizance by the trial Court in S.C.No.56 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 489(C) and 489(E) of IPC. Page 2 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 20243.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the second respondent is being an Advocate lodged complaint before the Commissioner of Police. However, it was refused to take action since no offence is made out. Thereafter, the second respondent filed private complaint before the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C in Crl.M.P.No.23726 of 2021 and the same was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, he preferred a revision in Crl.R.C.No.412 of 2022 before the this Court and the same was allowed by an order dated 07.04.2022. As directed by this Court, the first respondent registered FIR in Crime No.391 of 20223.1.He further submitted that the petitioner is the proprietor of Perambur Kaai Kani Super Ankadi and he is running the super market for the past 27 years. In his shop, he used to provide gift coupons/ vouchers in the form of plastic coins and laminated token slips to their regular customer. These plastic coins and laminated token slips are provided to their regular customer as a token gratitude, which the customers can utilize back in their shop for subsequent purchases. This Page 3 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024system is followed by the petitioner for the past several years. In fact, after purchasing the vegetables by the second respondent, he was paid balance amount by way of cash. In addition to the balance amount, he was provided with three numbers of plastic coins and three numbers of laminated token slips as gift. However, the second respondent insisted to pay by way of cash for the said gift voucher. Further the staff of the petitioner's shop refused to give any cash reward and he was duly informed that he can use the gift coupons while coming for subsequent purchase. Therefore, the second respondent foisted the false complaint as if the said coupons are counterfeit of Indian currency. 4.It is relevant to extract the definition in the provisions under Section 489(C) &(E) of IPC as follows :-“489C. Possession of forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes — Whoever has in his possession any forged or counterfeit currency-note or banknote, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both. .........Page 4 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024489E. Making or using documents resembling currency-notes or bank-notes — (1) Whoever makes, or causes to be made, or uses for any purpose whatsoever, or delivers to any person, any document purporting to be, or in any way resembling, or so nearly resembling as to be calculated to deceive any currencynote or bank-note shall be punished with fine which may extend to one hundred rupees. (2) If any person, whose name appears on a document the making of which is an offence under sub-section (1), refuses, without lawful excuse, to disclose to a police-officer on being so required the name and address of the person by whom it was printed or otherwise made, he shall be punished with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees. (3) Where the name of any person appears on any document in respect of which any person is charged with an offence under sub-section (1) or on any other document used or distributed in connection with that document it may, until the contrary is proved, be presumed that person caused the document to be made.”Thus it is clear that possession of forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes is an offence. Further making or using documents resembling currency notes or bank note is an offence under Section 49(E) of IPC. Page 5 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 20245.On perusal of the coupon issued by the petitioner's shop, it is only plastic coin and laminated token slip mentioning the value as “5” and “1”. Even from a simple glance through a naked eye clearly establishes that there is not even 0.001 of resemblance between the Indian currency. It is only plastic coin and laminated taken slip that too without mentioning as rupees. It is very unfortunate to state that even after looking at the so called coupons issued by the petitioner, the first respondent filed final report as if it attracts the offence under Sections 489(C) and 489(E) of IPC. There is absolutely no material to attract any of the offence as against the petitioner. 6.Insofar as the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC, to attract the said Section, there must be an uttering of words to affect the person who lodged the complaint. In this regard it is relevant to extract the Section 294(b) of IPC, as follows :-"294. Obscene acts and songs —Whoever, to the annoyance of others— (a) does any obscene act in any public place, or (b) sings, recites or utters any obscene song, ballad or words, in or near any public place, shall be punished with imprisonment of either Page 6 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine, or with both."7.Admittedly, there is absolutely no words uttered by the petitioner as such to constitute the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC, there is no averments and allegations. Further the charges do not show that on hearing the obscene words, which were allegedly uttered by the petitioner, the witnesses felt annoyed. No one has spoken about the obscene words, they felt annoyed and in the absence of legal evidence to show that the words uttered by the petitioner annoyed others, it can not be said that the ingredients of the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC is made out. 8.It is relevant to rely upon the judgment reported in 1996(1) CTC 470 in the case of K.Jeyaramanuju Vs. Janakaraj & anr., which held as follows :-"To prove the offence under Section 294 of IPC mere utterance of obscence words are not sufficient but there must be a further proof to establish that it was to the annoyance of others, which is lacking in the case."Page 7 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024The above judgment is squarely applicable to the present case and therefore, the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC is not at all attracted as against the petitioner. 9.In view of the above discussions, the impugned proceedings cannot be sustained and liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the proceedings in S.C.No.56 of 2024 on the file of the learned V Additional Sessions Court, Chennai, is hereby quashed and the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 11.03.2025Index: Yes/NoNeutral citation: Yes/NoSpeaking/non-speaking orderrtsPage 8 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024To1. The V Additional Judge,V Additional Sessions Court Chennai .2.The Inspector of Police,K1, Sembium Police Station,Pulianthope, Chennai.3. The Public Prosecutor,Madras High Court,Chennai.Page 9 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.rtsCrl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024 andCrl.M.P.No.5285 & 5287 of 202411.03.2025Page 10 of 10

Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 11.03.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANCrl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024and Crl.M.P.No.5285 & 5287 of 2024T.Pathmanaban... PetitionerVs.1. The State Rep byThe Inspector of Police,K1, Sembium Police Station,Pulianthope, Chennai.2. Sridhar... RespondentsPRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to call for the records of the case pending in S.C.No.56 of 2024 before the learned V Additional Sessions Court at Chennai and quash the same.For Petitioner: Mr.A.Natarajan, Senior Counsel For Ms.A.MadhumathiFor RespondentsFor R1: Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)Page 1 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024O R D E RThis Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.56 of 2024 on the file of the learned V Additional Sessions Court, Chennai, as against the petitioner.2.The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, the first respondent registered a FIR in Crime No.391 of 2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 489(C) and 489(E) of IPC, alleging that on 20.03.2021, when the second respondent went to purchase vegetable at a Super Market run by the petitioner in the name of Perambur Kaai Kani Super Ankadi, located at No.28, Bharathi Street, Perambur, Chennai and after purchasing the vegetables, he had paid the bill amount by way of cash. When he expected balance amount, the staff of the shop issued dummy currency i.e., three five rupee dummy currencies and three one rupee plastic coins. When the second respondent insisted for Indian currency, the staff of the shop threatened him and scolded him with filthy language. After completion of investigation, the respondent filed final report and the same has been taken cognizance by the trial Court in S.C.No.56 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 489(C) and 489(E) of IPC. Page 2 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 20243.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the second respondent is being an Advocate lodged complaint before the Commissioner of Police. However, it was refused to take action since no offence is made out. Thereafter, the second respondent filed private complaint before the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C in Crl.M.P.No.23726 of 2021 and the same was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, he preferred a revision in Crl.R.C.No.412 of 2022 before the this Court and the same was allowed by an order dated 07.04.2022. As directed by this Court, the first respondent registered FIR in Crime No.391 of 20223.1.He further submitted that the petitioner is the proprietor of Perambur Kaai Kani Super Ankadi and he is running the super market for the past 27 years. In his shop, he used to provide gift coupons/ vouchers in the form of plastic coins and laminated token slips to their regular customer. These plastic coins and laminated token slips are provided to their regular customer as a token gratitude, which the customers can utilize back in their shop for subsequent purchases. This Page 3 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024system is followed by the petitioner for the past several years. In fact, after purchasing the vegetables by the second respondent, he was paid balance amount by way of cash. In addition to the balance amount, he was provided with three numbers of plastic coins and three numbers of laminated token slips as gift. However, the second respondent insisted to pay by way of cash for the said gift voucher. Further the staff of the petitioner's shop refused to give any cash reward and he was duly informed that he can use the gift coupons while coming for subsequent purchase. Therefore, the second respondent foisted the false complaint as if the said coupons are counterfeit of Indian currency. 4.It is relevant to extract the definition in the provisions under Section 489(C) &(E) of IPC as follows :-“489C. Possession of forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes — Whoever has in his possession any forged or counterfeit currency-note or banknote, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both. .........Page 4 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024489E. Making or using documents resembling currency-notes or bank-notes — (1) Whoever makes, or causes to be made, or uses for any purpose whatsoever, or delivers to any person, any document purporting to be, or in any way resembling, or so nearly resembling as to be calculated to deceive any currencynote or bank-note shall be punished with fine which may extend to one hundred rupees. (2) If any person, whose name appears on a document the making of which is an offence under sub-section (1), refuses, without lawful excuse, to disclose to a police-officer on being so required the name and address of the person by whom it was printed or otherwise made, he shall be punished with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees. (3) Where the name of any person appears on any document in respect of which any person is charged with an offence under sub-section (1) or on any other document used or distributed in connection with that document it may, until the contrary is proved, be presumed that person caused the document to be made.”Thus it is clear that possession of forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes is an offence. Further making or using documents resembling currency notes or bank note is an offence under Section 49(E) of IPC. Page 5 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 20245.On perusal of the coupon issued by the petitioner's shop, it is only plastic coin and laminated token slip mentioning the value as “5” and “1”. Even from a simple glance through a naked eye clearly establishes that there is not even 0.001 of resemblance between the Indian currency. It is only plastic coin and laminated taken slip that too without mentioning as rupees. It is very unfortunate to state that even after looking at the so called coupons issued by the petitioner, the first respondent filed final report as if it attracts the offence under Sections 489(C) and 489(E) of IPC. There is absolutely no material to attract any of the offence as against the petitioner. 6.Insofar as the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC, to attract the said Section, there must be an uttering of words to affect the person who lodged the complaint. In this regard it is relevant to extract the Section 294(b) of IPC, as follows :-"294. Obscene acts and songs —Whoever, to the annoyance of others— (a) does any obscene act in any public place, or (b) sings, recites or utters any obscene song, ballad or words, in or near any public place, shall be punished with imprisonment of either Page 6 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine, or with both."7.Admittedly, there is absolutely no words uttered by the petitioner as such to constitute the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC, there is no averments and allegations. Further the charges do not show that on hearing the obscene words, which were allegedly uttered by the petitioner, the witnesses felt annoyed. No one has spoken about the obscene words, they felt annoyed and in the absence of legal evidence to show that the words uttered by the petitioner annoyed others, it can not be said that the ingredients of the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC is made out. 8.It is relevant to rely upon the judgment reported in 1996(1) CTC 470 in the case of K.Jeyaramanuju Vs. Janakaraj & anr., which held as follows :-"To prove the offence under Section 294 of IPC mere utterance of obscence words are not sufficient but there must be a further proof to establish that it was to the annoyance of others, which is lacking in the case."Page 7 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024The above judgment is squarely applicable to the present case and therefore, the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC is not at all attracted as against the petitioner. 9.In view of the above discussions, the impugned proceedings cannot be sustained and liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the proceedings in S.C.No.56 of 2024 on the file of the learned V Additional Sessions Court, Chennai, is hereby quashed and the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 11.03.2025Index: Yes/NoNeutral citation: Yes/NoSpeaking/non-speaking orderrtsPage 8 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024To1. The V Additional Judge,V Additional Sessions Court Chennai .2.The Inspector of Police,K1, Sembium Police Station,Pulianthope, Chennai.3. The Public Prosecutor,Madras High Court,Chennai.Page 9 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.rtsCrl.O.P.No.7297 of 2024 andCrl.M.P.No.5285 & 5287 of 202411.03.2025Page 10 of 10