Aasik Mohamed v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.02.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2795 of 2022 and Crl.M.P(MD)Nos.2100 and 2102 of 2022 1.Aasik Mohamed 2.Appas @ Appas Manthiri 3.Nazeer @ Nasimtheen 4.Sheik Fareeth 5.Akbar Ali 6.Mohamed Ashik 7.Arabu Batcha 8.Mohamed Yusuf
...Petitioners/ Accused Nos.1 to 3
5, 6, 11, 16 & 18 Vs.
1.State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Town West Police Station, Dindigul District.
(Crime No.464 of 2017) ...1st Respondent/Complainant 2.D.Suresh The Inspector of Police, Town West Police Station, Dindigul.
... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainants PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to call for the records in respect of C.C.No.4 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial Magisterate No.1, Dindigul and quash the same as against the petitioner concerned.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Venkatesh For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor(Crl.Side)
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.4 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial Magisterate No.1, Dindigul.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the facts of the case are exactly similar to the case covered in the decision reported in 2018 2 LW (Crl) 606 [Jeevanandham and others vs. The Inspector of Police Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District] dated 20.09.2018 and in the case of Sri Raja vs Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station Virudhunagar District and other in batch of cases in Crl.O.P(MD) No.7922 of 2019 dated 30.08.2019 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the facts of the case are similar to the facts covered under the Judgment referred above. 4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.
5. Perused the materials on record 6.The facts of this case is similar to the facts covered by the Judgment of this Court reported in 2018 2 LW (Crl) 606 [Jeevanandham and others vs. The Inspector of Police Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District] dated 20.09.2018 and in case of Sri Raja vs Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station Virudhunagar District and other in batch of cases in Crl.O.P(MD) No.7922 of 2019 dated 30.08.2019. Accordingly, the proceedings in C.C.No.4 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial Magisterate No.1, Dindigul, is hereby quashed insofar as the petitioner alone and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/- Deputy Registrar (CA & MC) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) lr Note:.1.In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To 1.The Judicial magistrate No.I, Dindigul.
2.The Inspector of Police, Town West Police Station, Dindigul District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2795 of 2022 09.02.2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ SS/07.03.2022 : 3P/4C