Mrs.S.Suganthi v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 26.04.2016 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.MALA Crl.O.P.No.27075 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015 S.Suganthi .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police Erumapatti police station Namakkal District.

2.N.Ethiraj 3.N.Padmaraj .. Respondents (R2 and R3 are impleaded as per the order of this Court dated 26.04.2016 made in Crl.M.P.No.4648 of 2016 in Crl.O.P.No.27075 of 2016) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 407 of Cr.P.C., to transfer the trial pending in C.C.No.407 of 2010 from the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Namakkal to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Salem and consequently, direct to complete the trial within the time as fixed by this Court in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sarath Chandran for M/S.K.M.Vijayan Associates For R1 : Mr.C.Emalias Addl. Public Prosecutor For R2 and R3 : Mr.Mohamed Hasain

O R D E R

The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking a direction for transfer the trial pending in C.C.No.407 of 2010 from the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Namakkal to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Salem and consequently, direct to complete the trial within the time as fixed by this Court in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the defacto complainant and whenever she attended the Court, the accused threatened not to depose any witness, for which, the petitioner some how managed, but the accused are armed with political pressure and money power. Hence, she has come forward with this petition for the above stated relief. 3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned counsel appearing for second and third respondents.

4.Considering the rival submissions made on both sides and perusing para-4 and 5 of the affidavit filed in support of this petition, I am of the view that the reason assigned by the petitioner is not meritorious. As per the version of the respondents 2 and 3/accused, the petitioner is an advocate and practicing at Namakkal. Under such circumstances, if the petitioner met out any threat at the hands of the accused, she may very well give a complaint against them. Admittedly, the petitioner has not given any such complaint. In such circumstances, the petitioner has come forward with this petition only with a view to drag on the proceedings. Therefore, the Criminal Original Petition deserves to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Erumapatti police station, Namakkal District.

2.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Chennai.

3.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Namakkal.

+1cc to Mr.M.Mohamed Hasain, Advocate Sr.25979 +1cc to M/S.K.M.Vijayan Associates, Advocate sr.26263 Crl.O.P.No.27075 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015 pa[co] srg 26/05/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/