← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/3062/2025allowed

Ramamirtham v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police

2025-03-18Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL CRL. OP(MD). No.3062 of 2025 and Crl.M.P(MD) No.2077 of 2025 Ramamirtham ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Karaikudi, Sivagangai District

2. The Inspector of Police Karaikudi North Police Station Sivagangai District 3.Chidambaram ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records of First Information Report in Crime No.111 of 2017 dated 08.02.2017 on the file of the second respondent police and quash the same as against this petitioner alone.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthu Malai Raja For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar No.1 and 2 Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Page No. 1 of 6

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.111 of 2017 on the file of the second respondent police.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused abused the defacto complainant who belongs to Scheduled caste using his caste name and also assaulted him due to political motive, thereby based on the complaint given by the third respondent the second respondent registered a case in Crime No.111 of 2017 for the offences under Sections 147,294(b),341, 506(i) of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST(PoA) Act.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that due to political motive the third respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioner and other accused and counter case has also been registered against the defacto complainant. In the meantime in the counter case the parties entered into compromise and the pending First Information Report in the counter case is also quashed as against all the accused. The present First Information Report Page No. 2 of 6

is also quashed as against other accused except this petitioner. At that time the petitioner was not aware of the same and the case is pending against this petitioner. Even as per the First Information Report there is no specific allegation as against this petitioner. There are only general allegations and no specific allegation as against this petitioner. Therefore the pending First Information Report is liable to be quashed.

4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that based on the complaint given by the third respondent the second respondent registered a case in Crime No.111 of 2017 for the offences under Sections 147,294(b),341, 506(i) of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST(PoA) Act. Already this Court quashed the First Information Report as against other accused and there is a counter case case registered as against the defacto complainant and the same was also quashed based on compromise. However this petitioner is not a party to the above compromise. Thereafter the investigation was stopped.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent would submit that the petitioner along with other accused abused the defacto complainant absuing his caste name and also criminally intimidated him using obscene Page No. 3 of 6

words. Based on the complaint the First Information Report has been registered and thereafter the matter has been compromised but as against this petitioner no compromise was recorded, therefore he objected to quash the First Information Report as against this petitioner.

6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

7. It is admitted fact that based on the complaint given by the third respondent the second respondent registered a case in Crime No.111 of 2017 for the offences under Sections 147, 294(b), 341, 506(i) of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST(PoA) Act. Already the First Information Report as against the other accused were quashed by this Court. Based on the compromise counter case was also quashed by this Court. Now this Court also perused the First Information Report and perusal of the First Information Report it reveals that there is no specific allegations as against this petitioner and only general allegations are levelled as against this petitioner. As against other accused this Court quashed the First Information Report and only as against this petitioner it is pending. It is also admitted that there is a political enmity pending between the parties. Since the matter has been compromised between the parties in respect of other accused and no any specific allegations Page No. 4 of 6

as against thie petitioner to constitute the offences under Sections 147,294(b), 341, 506(i) of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST(PoA) Act, thereby the pending First Information Report is nothing but abuse of process of law.

8. In view of the same, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the proceedings pending in First Information Report in Crime No.111 of 2017 on the file of the second respondent police is hereby quashed. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition stands closed. 18.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No aav To

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Karaikudi, Sivagangai District

2. The Inspector of Police Karaikudi North Police Station Sivagangai District 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Page No. 5 of 6

P.DHANABAL , J.

aav Crl.O.P(MD)No.3062 of 2025 18.03.2025 Page No. 6 of 6