High Court · 2025

Crl.O.P.No. 12833 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 25.04.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANCrl.O.P.No. 12833 of 2025andCrl.M.P.No.8492 of 2025 1.Maruthupandi 2.Harikaran ....PetitionersVs1.State rep. by The Sub-Inspector of Police,Harur Police Station,Dharmapuri District.Crime No.378 of 20242.Perumal....Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to the Crime No.378 of 2024 on the file of the 1st Respondent, quash the same by allowing this Criminal Original Petition.For Petitioner: Mr.J.PradeepFor R1: Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)O R D E RPage 1 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 12833 of 2025This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the FIR registered in Crime No.378 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent police, for the offences under Sections 296(b), 132, 115(2), 351(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3(1) of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 04.08.2024 at about 10.45 p.m. while the second respondent and his team were on patrol duty, the accused persons, under the influence of alcohol, assaulted the second respondent and his team and caused damages to the police vehicle. It is alleged that they abused and obstructed the second respondent and his team members from discharging their official duties. Hence, the complaint.3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that a false case has been foisted as against the petitioners. He further submitted that both the petitioners are Government servants and have been placed under suspension pursuant to the registration of the FIR.4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing Page 2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 12833 of 2025for the first respondent submitted that the petitioners are habitual offenders and having several cases pending against them. He further submitted that the petitioners, under the influence of alcohol, committed the offence against the police personnel and caused damage tot he police vehicle.5.Heard the learned Counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.6.It is seen from the First Information Report that there are specific allegations as against the petitioners to attract the offence, which has to be investigated in depth. Further the FIR is not an encyclopedia and it need not contain all facts and it cannot be quashed in its threshold. This Court finds that the FIR discloses prima facie commission of cognizable offence and as such this Court cannot interfere with the investigation. The investigating machinery has to step in to investigate, grab and unearth the crime in accordance with the procedures prescribed in the Code. 7.The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India passed in the Page 3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 12833 of 2025judgment reported in 2019 (14) SCC 350 in the case of Sau. Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar vs. The State of Maharashtra & ors., (Crl.A.No.255 of 2019 dated 12.02.2019 ) held that the learned Magistrate while taking cognizance and summoning, is required to apply his judicial mind only with the view to taking cognizance of the offence whether a prima facie case has been made out for summoning the accused person. The learned Magistrate is not required to evaluate the merits of the materials or evidence in support of the complaint, because the Magistrate must not undertake the exercise to find out whether the materials would lead to conviction or not. Only in a case where the complaint does not disclose any offence or is frivolous, vexatious or oppressive, the complaint/FIR can be taken for consideration for quashment. If the allegations set out in the complaint do not constitute the offence of which cognizance has been taken by Magistrate, it can be considered for quashment. Therefore, it is not necessary that a meticulous analysis of the case should be done before the trial to find out whether the case would end in conviction or acquittal. If it appears on a reading of the complaint and consideration of the allegations therein, in the light of the statement made on oath that the ingredients of the offence are disclosed, there would be no justification to interfere. At the initial stage of issuance of process, it is no open to the Page 4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 12833 of 2025Court to stifle the proceedings by entering into the merits of the contentions made on behalf of the accused. Therefore, the criminal complaint cannot be quashed only on the ground that the allegations made therein appear to be of a civil nature. If the ingredients of the offence alleged against the accused are prima facie made out in the complaint, the criminal proceeding shall not be interdicted.8.Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India issued directions in the judgment reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 315 in the case of M/s.Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Vs. State of Maharashtra & ors., as follows :-“23. .................... vi) Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial stage;vii) Quashing of a complaint/FIR should be an exception rather than an ordinary rule;..............xii) The first information report is not an encyclopaedia which must disclose all facts and details relating to the offence reported. Therefore, when the investigation by the police is in progress, the court should not go into the merits of the allegations in the FIR. Police must be permitted to complete the investigation. It would Page 5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 12833 of 2025be premature to pronounce the conclusion based on hazy facts that the complaint/FIR does not deserve to be investigated or that it amounts to abuse of process of law. After investigation, if the investigating officer finds that there is no substance in the application made by the complainant, the investigating officer may file an appropriate report/summary before the learned Magistrate which may be considered by the learned Magistrate in accordance with the known procedure;.............xv) When a prayer for quashing the FIR is made by the alleged accused and the court when it exercises the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., only has to consider whether the allegations in the FIR disclose commission of a cognizable offence or not. The court is not required to consider on merits whether or not the merits of the allegations make out a cognizable offence and the court has to permit the investigating agency/police to investigate the allegations in the FIR; .......”9.In view of the above discussions, this Court is not inclined to quash the First Information Report. However, the first respondent is directed to complete the investigation in Crime No.378 of 2024 and file a final report within a period of eight weeks from the date Page 6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 12833 of 2025of receipt of copy of this order.10.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.25.04.2025Index: Yes/NoNeutral citation: Yes/NoSpeaking/non-speaking orderLppTo1.The Sub-Inspector of Police,Harur Police Station,Dharmapuri District.2.The Public Prosecutor,High Court, Madras.Page 7 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 12833 of 2025G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.Lpp Crl.O.P.No. 12833 of 202525.04.2025Page 8 of 8