Vijaya @ Vijayalakshmi v. The Sub-Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.02.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA and Crl.M.P(MD)No.903 and 905 of 2020 Vijaya @ Vijayalakshmi ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs.

1.The Sub Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thirumayam, Puthukkottai District.

(Crime No.7 of 2013) 2.Punitha ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, to call for the records relating to Charge Sheet laid in C.C.No.197 of 2013 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Thirumayam, Puthukkottai District and quash the same in so far as the petitioner is concerned.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Prahalad Ravi For R1 : Mr.S.Chandarasekar, Additional Public Prosecutor.

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.197 of 2013, before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Thirumayam, Puthukkottai District. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case with oblique motive. The respondent police conducted the investigation in a mechanical manner and filed the charge sheet as against the petitioner and hence, sought for quashment of the proceedings.

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there are materials available to proceed with the case as against the petitioner herein and at the threshold, the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed and the charges framed against the petitioner has to be gone into a full-fledged trial. Further, he would submit that the trial has also been commenced and hence, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.

1/3

4.This Court is of the view that all the grounds can be raised before the trial Court and there is no merit in the quash petition. 5.At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner prayed that the personal appearance of the petitioner before the trial Court, may be dispensed with. 6.Accepting the said submission, the presence of the petitioner before the trial Court shall be dispensed with on condition that he shall be present on the first day of appearance , on the date fixed for receiving the copies, initial questioning, reply to charges and questioning under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., and at the time of passing judgment and whenever insisted upon by the trial court. 7.

The petitioner is further directed to give an undertaking in the form of affidavit that he will be duly represented by a counsel on all hearing dates and that the Counsel representing him will cross examine the prosecution witnesses on the same day they are examined in chief. The petitioner shall not dispute the identity of the witnesses. The petitioner shall appear before the Court in the event his presence is insisted by the trial judge for the purpose of identification. If the petitioner adopts any dilatorial tactics, it is open to the Trial Court to insist for his appearance and deal with the petitioner in accordance with the judgment of Supreme Court of India, in State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Shambunath Singh, reported in 2001 (4) SCC 667.

8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition in Crl.M.P(MD) No.903 of 2020 stands closed and Crl.M.P(MD) No.905 of 2020 stands ordered.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) sji To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Thirumayam, Puthukkottai District 2/3

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thirumayam, Puthukkottai District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1.CC. To Mr.B.Prahalad Ravi, Advocate in SR No.2737 and Crl.M.P(MD)No.903 and 905 of 2020 06.02.2020 MK (24.02.2020) 3P 5C 3/3