K.Samarasam v. Kadapattu R.Selvaraj

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 13.08.2018 Coram :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Crl.R.C.No.1314 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013

1. K.Samarasam

2. Kameshwari

3. T.Venkatesan

4. Alamelu

5. Arivalagan ... Petitioners/Accused 1 to 5 Vs.

Kadapattu R. Selvaraj ... Respondent/Complainant Criminal Revision is filed under Section 397 and 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying to set aside the order passed by the learned Principal District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Vaniyambadi dismissing the discharge petition in Crl.M.P.No.6462 of 2012 in C.C.No.206 of 2011 dated 02.09.2013.

For Petitioners : Mr.P.Ezhilnilavan For Respondent : No Appearance *****

O R D E R

The Criminal Revision Petition is filed as against the order made in Crl.M.P.No.6462 of 2012 in C.C.No.206 of 2011 on the file of the Principal District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Vaniyambadi, under Section 245 (2) Cr.P.C. seeking to discharge from the case and for compensation of Rs.11,00,000/-. The Magistrate after giving opportunity, dismissed the petition.

2. Feeling aggrieved against the order passed by the Magistrate, the petitioners filed this Criminal Revision Petition.

3. It is well settled proposition of law. At the time of dealing the petition filed under Section 245 (2) Cr.P.C, the Court has to see whether primafacie allegations is made out against the accused. The Court has to see the averments made in the complaint and also the relevant documents, produced by the complainant. At the same time, it is not necessary to see https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the defence taken by the respondent. Therefore, on a perusal of the materials available before this Court, there is a primafacie allegations leveled against the revision petitioners for framing of charge, the Court need not give any reason if the Court finds primafacie as against the accused to proceed further. There is a primafacie case as against the petitioner/Accused.

4. Hence, the Magistrate can proceed with the case against the accused. Under these circumstances, this Court finds, there is no merit in the revision and there is no illegality or perversity in the order passed by the learned Principal District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Vaniyambadi in Crl.M.P.No.6462 of 2012 in C.C.No.206 of 2011 dated 02.09.2013.

5. In the result, the Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

bri Sd/- Asst. Registrar(CS-V) //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To The Principle District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Vaniyambadi.

+ 1 CC TO M/s.P.EZHIL NILAVAN, ADVOCATE SR 55515 KR/15/10/18 Crl.R.C.No.1314 of 2013 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/