Karunanidhi v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 04.01.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH Crl.O.P.Nos.104 & 110 of 2019 and Crl.M.P.Nos.64 & 66 of 2019 Karunanidhi

...Petitioner

in both Crl.O.Ps Vs.

State rep. By The Sub-Inspector of Police, Jayankondam Police Station, Jayamkondam.

...Respondent in both Crl.O.Ps

COMMON PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to set aside the order dated 01.10.2018 made in C.M.P.Nos.1725 & 1726 of 2018 in C.C.Nos.26 and 33 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Jayankondam.

For Petitioner in both Crl.O.Ps : Mr.M.Guruprasad For Respondent in both Crl.O.Ps : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor COMMON ORDER These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed aggrieved by the order passed by the Court below dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., to examine one Chandrasekar as an additional witness on the side of the defence. 2.It is seen from the records that the petitioner is facing trial before the Court below for an offence under Section 379 of IPC. Prosecution had examined 8 witnesses and the petitioner had also examined 8 witnesses i.e. DW.1 to DW.8. The case was at the stage of final hearing even as early as 29.02.2016. However after seven months, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.

, in order to examine 2 more witnesses on the side of the defence. This petition was allowed by an order dated 12.01.2018. Pursuant to the order passed by the Court below, one Arun Kumar was examined as DW 7 and Dhanasekaran was examined as DW 8. Subsequently, another petition came to be filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., in the year 2018 on the ground that the petitioner wants https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.

to examine one more witness Chandrasekar on the side of the defence.

3.The Court below has given elaborate reasons for dismissal of the petition. The Court below has specifically given finding that even though the case was at the stage of final hearing in February 2016 itself, only because of the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., the case was kept pending till 2018 and two more witnesses were also allowed to examine on the side of the defence. Thereafter, the evidence was closed on 19.06.2018 and the case was posted for arguments on 22.06.2018. Thereafter, the case was adjourned atleast on four occasions and at this stage on 10.07.2018, the petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., to examine one Dhanasekar as defence witness. Therefore, the Court below has come to categoric finding that the entire attempt made by the petitioner is only to drag on with the proceedings. This Court does not find any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the Court below and there are absolute no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the Court below.

4.In the result, both the Criminal Original Petitions are dismissed. The Court below is directed to complete the proceedings within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS iv) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar rpl/mpa To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Jayankondam. 2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Jayankondam Police Station, Jayamkondam.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

Crl.O.P.Nos.104 & 110 of 2019 A.SK(30/01/2019) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/