← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/6535/2026allowed

A.Radhakrishnan v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

2026-03-26Honourable Mr Justice M. Nirmal Kumar16 pages

CRL.OP.No.6535 of 2026 M. NIRMAL KUMAR , J.

The matter is listed today under the caption "for being mentioned" at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the order dated 26.03.2026 in CRL.OP.No.6535 of 2026, instead of mentioning "Ex.P6", it was inadvertently mentioned as "Ex.P17" and the same may be corrected.

3. In view of the above submission, the Registry is directed to substitute "Ex.P17" with "Ex.P6" in paragraph 4. Further, the Registry is directed to substitute paragraphs 6 to 9 in the order dated 26.03.2026 with the following text and issue a fresh copy to the parties forthwith: "6.From the report, it is clear that the document of the petitioner in No.P-224/2009 was summoned from the Office of the Sub Registrar, Thiruporur, for the purpose of comparison and the same was sent to the Forensic Laboratory and the report also been received. This document has been marked as Ex.P6. The trial has concluded. There is no confirmation that 1\16

the petitioner is the person, who had submitted the document and also no objection for the document to be handed over to the petitioner. The only requirement is that the certified copy of the document can be replaced in case it requires for the appeal. 7.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made on both sides, it is seen that the trial has been completed, the accused had been convicted, the document has been marked as Ex.P6 by PW8 and the forensic report has also been collected, which also forms part of the case documents.

8.In view of the above, there cannot be any objection for returning Ex.P6 to the Office of the Sub Registrar, Thiruporur, for further processing of the document and thereafter, the petitioner can collect it from the Office of the Sub Registrar, Thiruporur.

9.As regards the substitution of the document in Ex.P6 is concerned, there shall be a direction to the Trial Court to substitute Ex.P6 with the a certified copy. The original document of Ex.P6 to be handed over to the Office of the Sub Registrar, Thiruporur, who shall depute a person to collect the same from the Trial Court. Thereafter, the document P-224/2009 to be admitted if it is in order and the sale deed to 2\16

be registered and handed over to the petitioner. The entire process to be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

07.04.2026 pvs 3\16

M. NIRMAL KUMAR , J.

pvs CRL.OP.No.6535 of 2026 07.04.2026 4\16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26-03-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

1. A.Radhakrishnan S/o.Arumugam, No. 4/3, Pillaiyar Koil Street, Kazhipattur Village, Padur Post, Thiruporur Taluk, Kanchipuram District.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police Crime Branch CID, Kanchipuram, Kancheepuram. Crime No. 13/2010 2.Anwar RPM Adam S/o.Pal Mohammed, No. 125, Suthanandha Bharathi Street, Ganapathypuram Post, East Tambaram, Chennai -59.

Respondent(s) PRAYER To set aside the docket order dt. 03.03.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Chengalpattu returning the petition filed under section 497 BNSS in C.C.No. 7/2015 and consequently direct the learned Magistrate to take the said petition on file and dispose of the same on merits and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

Ms.C.Anju Kawar for Mr.M.Vimal Bobby Crimson For Respondent(s):

Mr.Lenoard Arul Joseph Selvam Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petitioner is the complainant, who had lodged a complaint to the respondent police. The respondent police registered a case in crime No.13 of 2010. Thereafter, on conclusion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the Trial Court in CC.No.7 of 2015.

2.During trial, PW1 to PW31 were examined and Exs.P1 to P45 were marked on the side of the prosecution. Ex.D1 was marked on the side of defence. On the conclusion of the trial, the Trial Court by judgment dated 24.02.2026, had found the accused Anwar RPM Adam guilty and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment of two years u/s.419 of IPC, simple imprisonment of one year u/s.465 of IPC, simple imprisonment of two years and fine of Rs.5000/- in default two months simple imprisonment u/s.468 of IPC, simple imprisonment of one year u/s.471 of IPC. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed a petition under Section 497 of BNSS before the Trial Court. The Trial Court had returned the same on 03.03.2026 for the following reason:- "Since the appeal period is not over the documents cannot be returned at present. Hence this petition is returned."

3.In view of the above, the present petition has been filed.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in this case, the petitioner earlier submitted the sale deed for registration which was kept pending by the Office of the Sub Registrar, Thiruporur, in Pending Document No.P-224/2009. It has been collected from the Office of the Sub Registrar, Thiruporur, and marked as Ex.P17 in C.C.No.7 of 2015. The petitioner earlier filed Crl.O.P.No.24413 of 2017 before this Court, seeking to return the sale deed dated 27.07.2009 in Pending Document No.224/2009. This Court had dismissed the same for the reason, the trial is in progress and already 10 witnesses have been examined. Now the trial has been completed the hence, filed the present petition.

5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor had filed status report today and the same is scanned and extracted hereunder:-

6.From the report, it is clear that the document of the petitioner in No.P-224/2009 was summoned from the Office of the Sub Registrar, Thiruporur, for the purpose of comparison and the same was sent to the Forensic Laboratory and the report also been received. This document has been marked as Ex.P17. The trial has concluded. There is no confirmation that the petitioner is the person, who had submitted the document and also no objection for the document to be handed over to the petitioner. The only requirement is that the certified copy of the document can be replaced in case it requires for the appeal. 7.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made on both sides, it is seen that the trial has been completed, the accused had been convicted, the document has been marked as Ex.P17, forensic report has also been collected, which also forms part of the case documents.

8.In view of the above, there cannot be any objection for returning Ex.P17 to the Office of the Sub Registrar, Thiruporur, for further processing of the document and thereafter, the petitioner can collect it from the Office of the Sub Registrar, Thiruporur.

9.As regards the substitution of the document in Ex.P17 is concerned, there shall be a direction to the Trial Court to substitute Ex.P17 with the certified copy and replace it as Ex.P17. The original of Ex.P17 to be handed over to the Office of the Sub Registrar, Thiruporur, who shall depute a person to collect the same from the Trial Court. The entire process to be completed within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10.In view of the aforesaid directions, the docket order dated 03.03.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Chengalpattu, is set aside and this petition stands allowed.

26-03-2026 krk Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.State Rep. by The Inspector of Police Crime Branch CID, Kanchipuram, Kancheepuram. Crime No. 13/2010 2.Anwar RPM Adam S/o.Pal Mohammed, No. 125, Suthanandha Bharathi Street, Ganapathypuram Post, East Tambaram, Chennai -59.

3.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Chengalpattu.

4.The Office of the Sub Registrar, Thiruporur.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.

krk 26-03-2026