Karthik v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.06.2025 Coram:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN and Crl.M.P.No.9526 of 2025 Karthik S/o.Balaji Rep. by his mother and natural guardian Selvi ... Petitioner Vs.

1. State rep. by The Inspector of Police Chengalpattu Taluk Police Station Chengalpattu District Crime No.442 of 2024

2. Shek Mohamad ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 to call for the entire records in connection with Crime No.442 of 2024, on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same in so far as the petitioner is concerned.

1/6

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vijaya Ragavan For 1 st Respondent : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner to quash the FIR in Crime No.442 of 2024, on the file of the first respondent police in so far as the petitioner is concerned.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant/second respondent is that he is working as a Site Incharge at G.K.Chetty Builders which is constructing apartments in Mahendra City. Few North Indian labours who are engaged for construction work, are staying in a tin shed nearby Paranur Railway Station. While so, on 12.07.2024, the petitioner along with other accused, came there and robbed Rs.4,800/- from the said North Indian labours. Hence, based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the case in Crime No.442 of 2024 was registered against the petitioner and others for the offence under Sections 332 and 311 of BNS, 2023. 2/6

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and since the petitioner is a friend of other accused persons, he has been falsely arrayed as an accused. He further submitted that there is no material or evidence against the petitioner to attract the offence under Section 332 and 311 of BNS. He also submitted that the petitioner is doing EET (Diploma Course) 2nd year at Shri Harshika Institute of Technical and Health Education at Preungalathur. If the criminal proceedings is continued against the petitioner, it will affect his future and further studies. Hence, he prayed to quash the FIR against the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that at the time of occurrence, the petitioner was a juvenile. The respondent police have already completed the investigation and filed the charge sheet before the Juvenile Board, Kancheepuram.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the first respondent police and 3/6

also perused the materials available on record.

6. Since no adverse order is being passed against the second respondent, notice to the second respondent is dispensed with.

7. It is seen that already the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has also been filed and now the matter is pending before the Juvenile Justice Board.

8. Therefore, is Criminal Original Petition is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 03.06.2025 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No ksa-2 4/6

To

1. The Inspector of Police Chengalpattu Taluk Police Station Chengalpattu District

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras 5/6

P.VELMURUGAN. J.

Ksa-2 03.06.2025 6/6