S.Mathavi v. The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.12.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Crl.O.P.No.4985 of 2010 & M.P.No.1 of 2010
1. Ms.S.Mathavi
2. Mr.R.Rajkumar
3. Mr.P.Pandi
4. Mr.S.Nagarajan
5. Mr.M.Mahendran
6. Mr.P.Thanasekaran
7. Ms.Tamilarasi
8. Ms.Bharathi
9. Mr.P.Muthu Krishnan 10.Agastas
11. Mr.Selvaraj
12. Mr.S.Marimuthan
13. Mr.R.Manimuthu
14. Mr.S.Senthil Kannan
15. Mr.S.Rajiv Gandhi
16. Mr.P.Kondiraj
17. Mr.Rajkumar
18. Mr.Nayagam
19. Mr.Manokaran
20. Mr.Venmani @ Paavendan
21. Mr.Kalanidhi
22. Mr.Senthil
23. Mr.Kavin
24. Mr.Maharaja
25. Mr.S.Sundhararaj
26. Mr.Muthukumar
27. Mr.A.Karim
28. Mr.T.Malaravan
29. Mr.N.Umashankar
30. Mr.Rajedush
31. Mr.Jayapaul
32. Mr.K.Manokaran
33. Mr.Thangaraj
34. Mr.M.Raja
35. Mr.S.Sakthivadivel
36. Mr.N.Manickam 1/5
37. Mr.S.Rajendhran
38. Mr.S.Ramesh
39. Mr.N.Selvan
40. Mr.T.Muruganantham
41. Mr.Ambedkardoss
42. Mr.K.Muthukrishnan
43. Mr.Vijayan
44. Mr.R.Sathyamoorthi
45. Mr.A.Kurubatham
46. Mr.R.Marikkumar
47. Mr.V.Kumaresan
48. Mr.R.Ramesh
49. Mr.Manickam
50. Mr.R.Arulmozhi
51. Mr.C.Gandhi
52. Mr.M.Kannan
53. Mr.R.Raja
54. Mr.P.Pannerselvam
55. Mr.P.Kumar
56. Mr.R.Ramesh Kumar
57. Mr.M.Rangaraj
58. Mr.T.Sathyamoorthy
59. Mr.R.Ragu
60. Mr.P.Pulithamizan ... Petitioners Vs.
1. The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Vadavalli Police Station, Coimbatore District.
(Cr.No.55 of 2008)
2. Mr.N.Muruganandam [The second respondent impleaded as per the Order of this Court dated 09.03.2010 in M.P.No.2 of 2010] ... Respondents Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the entire records connected with charge sheet in S.T.C.No.112 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Coimbatore and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.Saravanan For Respondents : Ms.Saradadevi - R1 2/5
O R D E R
This criminal original petition has been filed seeking to call for the records connected with charge sheet in S.T.C.No.112 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Coimbatore and quash the same.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that without going into the merits of the case, it would be suffice, if this Court issues direction to the Trial Court to expedite the trial and complete the same as early as possible. He would further submit that the appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court may be dispensed with and would further submit that the petitioners are ready to appear as and when necessary arise.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent concede to the request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.
4. In view of the above, this Court directs the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.VI, Coimbatore, to expedite the trial in S.T.C.No.112 of 2008 and complete the same as early as possible. The appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court is dispensed with. However, this order will not stand on the way of the Trial Court to insist for the appearance of the petitioners for receiving copies under Section 207 of Cr.P.C., framing of charges, questioning under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and judgment and as and when the Trial Court feels it necessary.
5. With the above directions, this criminal original petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.VI Coimbatore.
3/5
2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.
3.The Inspector of Police, Vadavalli police Station, Coimbatore District.
+1cc to Mr.Saravanan, Advocate sr.105219 Crl.O.P.No.4985 of 2010 pa(co) nr 14/02/2020 4/5