High Court · 2025

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.503 of 2023BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 03.01.2025CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESHCrl.O.P.(MD) No.503 of 2023Kangeyavel ... PetitionerVs.1.The Inspector of Police Kalayarkovil Police Station Sivagangai District.... Respondent/Complainant2.Mani @ Subramaniyan3.Ayyappan... Respondents/Accused inSC.No.118/144.Kaleeswaran5.Pachapillai... Respondents/Accused inSC.No.118/15 PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to withdraw the case in S.c.No.118 of 2014 and S.C.No.118 of 2015 (split-up from SC No.118/2014) on the file of Principal District Judge, Sivagangai and transfer the same to any other nearby district. 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.503 of 2023 For Petitioner : Mr.K.Jeyamohan For Respondents : Mr.S.Ravi Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 Mr.G.Karuppasamay Pandian for R4 No appearance for R2, R3, R5 O R D E RThis petition has been filed seeking for transfer of the case pending in S.C.No.118 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Sivagangai to some other district. 2. The case of the petitioner is that his son-in-law was murdered and an FIR came to be registered in Crime No.333 of 2000. After investigation, the police report was filed and the same was taken on file in S.C.No.5 of 2005 and the case was pending before the Principal District Judge, Sivagangai. There were totally nine accused persons in this case. Four accused persons underwent trial and by judgment dated 02.08.2017, all those accused persons (A1 to A4) were acquitted from all charges. During the pendency of this case, the case was split-up in S.C.No.118 of 2014 for two of the accused persons and S.C.No.118 of 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.503 of 20232015 for the remaining two accused persons. Ultimately, both these cases were clubbed and the case is now pending in S.C.No.118 of 2014 before the Principal District Judge, Sivagangai where the remaining four accused persons will have to face trial. At this juncture, the present petition has been filed seeking for transfer of the case to some other district mainly on the ground that the witnesses are being put to threat and they are not able to effectively give giving evidence before the Sivagangai Court. The other ground is that the brother of one of the accused persons is a practising Advocate in the same Court and he is also causing threat to the witnesses and ensuring that a fair trial is not conducted in this case. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent.4. The ground that was raised in this petition was also raised in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15224 of 2023 which was filed to cancel the anticipatory bail granted in favour of A2. This Court took into 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.503 of 2023consideration the threat perspective faced by the witnesses and also took into consideration the present transfer petition pending and cancelled the anticipatory bail granted in favour of A2. 5. Apart from the above, A2 moved an anticipatory bail petition subsequently in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13257 of 2024 and a detailed order was passed by this Court on 13.08.2024 by issuing certain directions. It is informed that this petition was not listed thereafter. In the mean time, A2 has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody. 6. As on today, out of the four accused persons, three accused persons are inside jail and one of the accused person namely Pachapillai was enlarged on bail considering his medical condition. 7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the case came up for hearing before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Sivagangai on 28.10.2024 and on that day, the Sessions Judge had fixed the dates for trial from 17.12.2024 to 19.12.2024. When the case was listed on 11.12.2024, it was brought to the notice of the 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.503 of 2023learned Sessions Judge that a petition has been filed before this Court seeking for transfer of the case and hence, the trial Court kept the proceedings in abeyance and the matter is listed on 08.01.2025. 8. The first apprehension raised is that the witnesses are being subjected to threat and some of the witnesses are not allowed to come before the Court to depose. The main accused persons are now inside jail and therefore, it is improbable that they will cause any threat to the witnesses. In any case, the respondent police shall ensure that proper protection is given to the witnesses and that none of the witnesses are subjected to any threat by the accused persons or others. 9. The second apprehension that has been raised by the petitioner is that the brother of the one of the accused persons is practising as an advocate in the same Court. In the instant case, the prosecution case is conducted by the Public Prosecutor and the petitioner has already filed an application before the trial Court seeking for permission to assist the prosecution and the same has been allowed. Therefore, just because the brother of one of the accused is practising as 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.503 of 2023an advocate that by itself should not come in the way of the Public Prosecutor conducting the case for the State and the counsel appearing for the victim effectively assisting the prosecution. It goes without saying that the trial Court will ensure that none of the witnesses are subjected to any threat and none of the witnesses are prevented from deposing before the Court. In other words, the trial Court shall effectively exercise its power and jurisdiction under Section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act. 10. The transfer of this case at this stage will only further delay the trial and it must be kept in mind that three of the accused persons are now inside jail. Therefore, with the above safeguards, the trial can proceed further in this case before the same Court. When the case comes up for hearing on 08.01.2025, the learned trial Judge shall fix the date for examination of witnesses and shall ensure that the examination of witnesses is concluded within the schedule fixed by the trial Court. In any event, the trial Court shall ensure that the entire proceedings are concluded within a period of three months. 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.503 of 202311. This Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with the above directions. 03.01.2025NCC :Yes / No1/2Index :Yes / NoInternet :Yes / NoPKNTo1.The Inspector of Police Kalayarkovil Police Station Sivagangai District.2.The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.Note: Issue order copy on 06.01.2025.7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.503 of 2023N.ANAND VENKATESH,J.PKNCrl.O.P.(MD)No.503 of 2023Dated: 03.01.20251/28/8