M.Baskaran v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Cumbum North
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 29.06.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR Crl.O.P(MD)No.12695 of 2026 Baskaran ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by The Inspector of Police, Cumbum North PS, Theni District.
Crime No.355 of 2023 ... 1st Respondent/Complainant
2. Ragavan District Designated Officer, Food Safety Department, Theni District.
... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records pertaining to the S.T.C.No.532 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.B.E.Ashwin Bala Someshwerar For R1 : Mr.P.Samuel Gunasingh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/5
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by the sole accused in S.T.C.No. 532 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, seeking to quash the charge sheet, wherein, the petitioner is charged with the offence under Sections 353 and 506(1) of IPC.
2. A perusal of the charge sheet reveals that it has been lodged by the District Designated Oficer under the Food Safety Department, alleging that the petitioner, who is the owner of a fruit shop had prevented him from inspecting the premises. It is further alleged that the petitioner has threatened the government officials from doing their duty.
3. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on 03.10.2023, there was an inspection of the premises. After two days, emergency notice was issued and an interim order was granted by this Court. Again the premises were sealed and challenging the sealing of the premises, another writ petition was filed and an interim order was granted and it was not complied with, which resulted in filing of the contempt petition. According to him, all these incidents clearly established the animosity of the 2/5
defacto complainant in lodging the police complaint. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the police officials were present at the time of inspection and therefore, the allegation in the charge sheet are false.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.
5. A perusal of the charge sheet clearly reveals that on 03.10.2023, when the defacto complainant was conducting inspection in the shops located near the bus stand, the petitioner is said to have interfered with the continuing of the inspection. The other proceedings under the Food Safety Act are also dated 03.10.2023 and in such circumstances, the same cannot be considered to be the previous animosity between the petitioner and others.
6. In such view of the matter, there are no merits in this petition. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 29.06.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No ebsi 3/5
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam.
2. The Inspector of Police, Cumbum North PS, Theni District.
3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4/5
R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.
ebsi Crl.O.P(MD)No.12695 of 2026 29.06.2026 5/5