J.Arul v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.09.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR Crl.O.P.No. 26160 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.Nos.17808 and 17813 of 2025 1.
J.Arul N.Rajesh 3.
N.Chengalvarayan 4.
N.Masthan 5.
R.Munirathinam 6.
C.Srinivasan 7.
N.Sekar 8.
R.Dinesh 9.
B.Prabhakaran 10.
V.Selvam 11.
S.Aaishabi 12.
S.Sabu 13.
R.Bharathi 14.
N.Kishtaiya 15.
N.Sampoornammal 16.
R.Renuka 17.
K.Jibedabegam 18.
M.Shakila 19.
K.Veerarahavan 20.
B.Nagaposhanam ... Petitioners Vs.
1.
The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Arambakkam Police Station, Tiruvallur District, (In Crime No.24 of 2021) Page Nos.1/5
Saied Nasrulla ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023, to call for the records culminating in S.C.No.27 of 2024 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge at Tiruvallur and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Mohan For Respondents : Mr.R.Vinoth Raja Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the charge sheet in S.C.No.27 of 2024 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Tiruvallur.
2. The entire allegations in the final report indicate that the petitioners herein/A1 to A20 had unlawfully assembled together with various agricultural equipments and attempted to enter into the land of the de-facto complainant and also damaged iron-fencing and cementposts in the land of the de-facto complainant and also caused damage worth about Rs.11 lakhs. Hence, the first respondent-Police registered a Page Nos.2/5
case in Crime No.24 of 2021 against the petitioners. After investigation, the first respondent-Police had laid a charge-sheet in S.C.No.27 of 2024 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 427, 447, 506 (Part 1) IPC read with Section 109 IPC and Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage & Loss) Act, 1992 against the petitioners.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent and perused the materials available on record.
4. On a perusal of the entire records, particularly, the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161(3) of Cr.P.C., it is seen that all the witnesses have clearly spoken about the involvement of the petitioners herein in the alleged offences.
5. In such view of the matter, this Court cannot conduct roving enquiry or mini-trial to appreciate the veracity of the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161(3) of Cr.P.C. Hence, I do not find any merit in the quash petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. Page Nos.3/5
6. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioners requested this Court to dispense with the presence of the petitioners before the trial Court. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the presence of the petitioners is dispensed with, except for receipt of copies, answering the charges, questioning under section 313 Cr.P.C./351 BNSS and on the date of pronouncing judgment and on any other dates as fixed by the trial Court.
7. With the above observations and direction, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
23.09.2025 Index : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No ms To 1.
The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur.
The Inspector of Police, Arambakkam Police Station, Tiruvallur District.
3.
The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Page Nos.4/5
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
ms 23.09.2025 Page Nos.5/5