Madras High CourtCRL RC/1001/2009dismissed as infructuous

Ravichandran v. State By

2015-08-28Honourable Mr Justice A. Selvam2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated: 28.08.2015 Coram The Honourable Mr. Justice A.SELVAM Crl. R.C.No.1001 of 2009 Ravichandran .. Petitioner/ Accused vs.

State by Inspector of Police CBI/ACB/Chennai .. Respondent/ Complainant Revision under Sections 397 and 401 of Criminal Procedure Code to set aside the order dated 1.10.2009 and made in Crl.M.P.No.631/2009 in C.C.No.3/2007 on the file of the II Additional District Judge (CBI Cases), Coimbatore. For petitioner : No appearance For respondent : Mr.K.Srinivasan, Spl.Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This Criminal Revision Case has been directed against the order dated 1.10.2009 passed in Crl.M.P.No.631/2009 in C.C.No.3/2007 by the II Additional District and Sessions Court (CBI Cases), Coimbatore.

2.The material averments made in the petition are that the petitioner has been shown as sole accused in C.C.No.3 of 2007, wherein, the persons mentioned in the petition have been examined on the side of the prosecution as P.Ws.5, 11, 12, 13, 15 and 16 and in fact they are responsible for commission of offences. Under the said circumstances, the said petition has been filed so as to implead them as accused in Calendar Case No.3 of 2007.

3. The trial court, after considering the available evidence on record, has dismissed the petition. Against the dismissal order, the present Criminal Revision Case has been preferred on the file of this Court.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner is not present, whereas the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent has contended that C.C.No.3 of 2007 has been disposed of on 21.10.2010 by the trial court and therefore, the relief sought for in the present petition has become infructuous.

5. In fact, on the side of the respondent, the judgment passed in C.C.No.3 of 2007 has been submitted for perusal of the Court and the Court has perused the same and found that the accused therein has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment as stated therein.

6. Considering the fact that the present petition has been filed under section 319 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 so as to implead the persons mentioned therein as accused and also considering that Calendar Case No.3 of 2007 has already been disposed of, the relief sought for in the present petition has become infructuous and consequently, the present Criminal Revision Case deserves to be dismissed.

In fine, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as infructuous.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS IV ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar ajr To

1. The II Additional District Judge (CBI Cases), Coimbatore.

2. Inspector of Police, CBI/ACB/Chennai 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Crl.R.C.No.1001 of 2009 KM (CO) kk 9/9 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/