Rajasekaran v. The State Represented By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.01.2020
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM Crl.O.P.No.1024 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.No.628 of 2020 1.Rajasekaran 2.Muthuvel 3.Kathiravan 4.Pandurangam 5.Subramani 6.Mani 7.Sekar 8.Kumar 9.Asaithambi 10.Nagamani 11.Vijaya W/o.Karunakaran 12.Vijaya W/o.Munusamy 13.Rani 14.Kumareshwar
...Petitioners
-VsState Rep by Inspector of Police Peranamallur Police Station Thiruvannamalai District.
(Cr.No.155/2019)
...Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to S.T.C.No.107 of 2019 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar.
For Petitioners : Mr.K.C.Karl Marx For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
This petition has been filed by the accused Nos.1 to 14 to quash the final report in S.T.C.No.107 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that an FIR was registered in Cr.No.155/2019 against the
petitioners herein under Sections 143 and 188 of IPC. He further submitted that the complainant himself has proceeded to investigate the matter and filed the final report. Hence, the investigation is vitiated. He further submitted that based on the said final report, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, has taken the case on file. He further submitted that as per Section 195(1)(a) of Cr.P.C., taking cognizance in respect of the offence under Section 188 IPC can be made only based on the complaint filed by the concerned Officer in writing but in this case, the said procedure has not been followed and on the contrary, the respondent police filed a final report and based on the said police report, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, has taken the case on file and on that ground also, the proceedings against the petitioners in S.T.C.No.107 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar has to be quashed.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has fairly conceded that the Officer, who lodged the complaint against the petitioner has himself investigated the matter and filed the final report. Further, he fairly conceded that taking cognizance of the offence under Section 188 of IPC is barred by Section 195(1)(a) Cr.P.C., hence, he prayed to pass an appropriate order.
4. Section 195(1)(a) Cr.P.C. Reads thus:
"Section 195: Prosecution for contempt of lawful authority of public servants, for offences against public justice and for offences relating to documents given in evidence:-
(1) No Court shall take cognizance (a) (i) if any offence punishable under Sections 172 to 188 (both inclusive) of the Indian Penal Code (45 to 1860), or (ii) of any abetment of, attempt to commit, such offence, or (iii) of any criminal conspiracy to commit, such offence, except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate:"
5. From the aforesaid provision, it is clear that no Court shall take cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 172 to 188 (both inclusive) of Indian Penal Code, except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. In this case, no such complaint has been filed in respect of the offence under Section 188 IPC, but on the contrary, the respondent has filed a final report and based on the same, the Magistrate has taken the case on file.
6. Since taking cognizance of the case in respect of the offence under Section 188 IPC is not in accordance with the provision of Section 195(1)(a) Cr.P.C., the other offence under Section 143 IPC is being an ancillary one, the entire final report is liable to be quashed. Apart from that it appears that the officer, who lodged the complaint has himself investigated the matter and filed a final report. On that ground, the investigation is vitiated and the said FIR is also liable to be quashed.
7. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The proceedings against the petitioners herein in S.T.C.No.107 of 2019 alone quashed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar drl To 1.The Inspector of Police Peranamallur Police Station Thiruvannamalai District.
2.The Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar.
3. do Thro The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvannamalai.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.Karl Marx, Advocate, S.R.No. 3782 Crl.O.P.No.1024 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.No.628 of 2020 KK(CO) GN(20/02/2020)