N.Baskaran v. The State By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and Crl.M.P.No.3026 of 2025 N.Baskaran ... Petitioner Vs

1. State by Inspector of Police, Kalasapakkam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

Crime No.297 of 2014

2. P.Pratheeba ... Respondents Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., to call for the records relating to the First Information Report registered in Crime No.297 of 2014 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kalasapakkam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District/first respondent herein and quash the same.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Munusamy For Respondents : Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) (for R1)

O R D E R

This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in Crime No.297 of 2014 on the file of the first respondent herein.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, the first respondent registered the First Information Report in Crime No. 297 of 2014, alleging that the petitioner had failed to make entries in the account book whenever deposits were accepted from the depositors during the year 2011. Hence, the complaint.

3. On a perusal of records, it is revealed that there is no complaint from any depositors. Only on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, that too alleging that the petitioner had failed to make entries in the ledger in respect of the deposits. It is not the case of the second 2/5

respondent that the petitioner had misappropriated the amount of the depositors. Further, though the occurrence was in the year 2011, the complaint was lodged only in the year 2014. Even after registration of the First Information Report in the year 2014, till today, the first respondent did not even proceed with the First Information Report and it is pending for investigation. Therefore, no offence is made out as against the petitioner, as alleged by the second respondent.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent. Though notice has been served, the second respondent has not appeared, either in person or through Counsel.

5. In view of the above, merely keeping the First Information Report would not serve any purpose. However, in order to meet the ends of justice, this Court is inclined to quash the First Information Report. Accordingly, the First Information Report in Crime No. 297 of 2014 is hereby quashed.

3/5

6. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 27.03.2025 Index:Yes/No kv To

1. The Inspector of Police, Kalasapakkam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

4/5

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

kv 27.03.2025 5/5