The State Rep By Its Inspector Of Police, v. Srinivasan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY (P.R.C.No.88 of 2018 of V Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore Taluk, Chennai) Inspector of Police K5, Peravallur Police Station Chennai - 82.

... Petitioner Vs.

1.Nelson 2.Srinivasan .... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sugendran Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The allegation of the prosecution in this case is that on 17.07.2009 at about about 10.00 am, near the Agaram Anju temple, when the defactocomplainant was walking on his way, one of the accused waylaid the defactocomplainant, abused him with filthy language, brandished knife and snatched the chain. However, the public gathered and both the accused were arrested by the police and the chain was recovered from them. The motor cycle in which Page No.1 of 4

they were travelling was also brought to the police station and upon which, a case in Crime No.281 of 2009 for the alleged offences under Section 341, 336, 392, 397 and 506 (ii) of IPC was registered.

2. After completion of investigation, an absconding charge sheet was filed as against the accused No.2, while the accused No.1 alone appeared. The said charge sheet was taken on file as P.R.C.No.14 of 2010. Thereafter, the case was split up against the absconding accused and is now pending in P.R.C.No.88 of 2018. As far as the accused No.1 is concerned, S.C.No.399 of 2018 was taken up for trial.

3. As a matter of fact, the defacto-complainant as well as his wife had passed away. After examination of all the other witnesses, for want of evidence, the case against the 1st accused was acquitted. In the meanwhile, the case against the 2nd accused is pending for the past 15 years and the petitioner - Police is unable to execute the warrant. The whereabouts of the 2nd accused is not known. Even his identity is doubted.

4. In view of the acquittal of the case on merits, as against the accused No.1, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending and by Page No.2 of 4

executing the NBW, anytime hereafter also. The occurrence was happened in the year 2009 and after the final report is filed, the matter is pending from the year 2010, for the past 15 years.

5. In view thereof, this is a fit case for exercise of power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., and accordingly P.R.C.No.88 of 2018 shall stands quashed and the Suo Motu Transfer Case stands allowed. 19.08.2025 Jer electronically alone. The Trial Court shall take note of the order and accordingly classify the case pending before them as allowed / dismissed / disposed of, etc, and while doing so, consider any applications such as disposal of properties, etc., and pass appropriate orders, as may be necessary. Further, the Court below is directed to dispatch the copy of this order to all concerned.

Page No.3 of 4

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

Jer 19.08.2025 Page No.4 of 4