A.Sampath v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.06.2025 Coram:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Crl.O.P.No.14247 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.9801 of 2025

1. A.Sampath

2. V.Tamilvanan ... Petitioners Vs.

1. The Inspector of Police Pachal Police Station Tiruvannamalai District

2. R.Thavamani ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the entire case records, pertaining to the case in Crime No.4 of 2025 on the file of the respondent/complainant and quash the same as far as the petitioners Nos.3 and 4 are concerned.

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Gangadaran For 1 st Respondent : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/6

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners to quash the FIR in Crime No.4 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, as far as the petitioners/A4 and A3 are concerned.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 13.12.2024 at about 8.00 a.m., the petitioners along with two other accused, abused and attacked the defacto complainant/second respondent. Hence, based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the FIR in Crime No.4 of 2025 was registered against the petitioners and others for the offence under Sections 296(b), 131, 115(2) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. In fact, the first petitioner is working as a Conductor and the second petitioner is working in a private concern and that at the time of alleged occurrence, they were not at all 2/6

present in the occurrence place. Due to personal grudge, a false case has been foisted against the petitioners. Hence, he prayed to quash the FIR as against the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that there are prima facie allegations against the petitioners. He further submitted that the investigation is almost completed and the statements of the witnesses reveal the offence committed by the petitioners.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the first respondent police and 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. A perusal of the complaint and the FIR, prima facie there are allegations against the petitioners. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to quash the FIR.

3/6

8. The respondent police is directed to complete the investigation and file the charge sheet within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

9. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

10. However, the petitioners are at liberty to work out their remedy after the filing of the charge sheet.

03.06.2025 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No ksa-2 4/6

To

1. The Inspector of Police Pachal Police Station Tiruvannamalai District

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

P.VELMURUGAN. J.

Ksa-2 03.06.2025 6/6