V.Dhakshinamoorthy v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 01.04.2016 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.MALA Crl.O.P.No.7119 of 2016 and Crl.M.P.No.No.3713 of 2016 1.V.Dhakshinamoorthy 2.S.Prabhu Durai 3.Jayakanthan .. Petitioners Vs.

1. The State represented by The Sub Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Egmore, Chennai-8 X Crime No.552 of 2004.

2. K.Palanisamy .. Respondent Prayer:-Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in C.C.No.1750 of 2010 on the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai and quash the proceedings against the petitioners. For Petitioners : Mr.H.Rajasekar For R1 : Mr.C.Emalias Addl.Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petitioners who are the accused in C.C.No.1750 of 2010 on the file of the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai has come forward with this petition to quash the proceedings against them for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B and 420 r/w 120-B IPC.

2.Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the basis of the complaint given by the second respondent, an FIR has been registered in Crime No.552 of 2004 on 20.10.2004 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 408 and 120(B) IPC, after investigation charge sheet has been laid in the year 2010, which was taken on file in C.C.No.1750 of 2010 on the file of the learned III Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai. He further submitted that it is only a commercial transaction between the petitioner and the second respondent and so, the

ingredients of Section 420 is not made out. He would also submit that there was a settlement effected between the parties. Hence he prays for quash the proceedings.

3.Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and perused the typed set of papers.

4.The petitioners are arrayed as A1 to A3. According to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, A2 is absconding from the date of registration of the case. Further it was stated in the charge sheet that Accused No.2 is not arrested and absconding charge sheet has been filed. Eventhough, it was stated that the matter has been settled between the parties, they may very well file the same before the Trial Court. The case has been registered in the year 2004, after six years i.e. in the year 2010, charge sheet has been filed and now, in the year 2016, the petitioner has come forward with this petition to quash the proceedings, which shows the malafide intention of the petitioners to drag on the proceedings. Further, even today Accused No.2 has not been surrendered before the Trial Court.

In such circumstances, I do not find any reason to quash the proceedings and it is a fit case for giving direction to the second petitioner. Accordingly, the second petitioner is directed to surrender before the III Metropolitan Magistrate Court, George Town, Chennai and file an application to recall the warrant. On such application being filed, the learned III Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai is directed to dispose of the case within a short spell of time. 5.In the result, the criminal original petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. kkd s/d- Assistant Registrar(CO) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.

2. The III Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai.

3. Do thro the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai 8.

4.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Chennai.

+ 1 cc to Mr.H.Rajasekar, Advocate SR 20441 skv(co) prk20/4 Crl.O.P.No.7119 of 2016 and Crl. M.P.No.3713 of 2016