Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/7325/2017dismissed

Pavul Sugirtharaj v. The Inspector Of Police

2017-06-16Honourable Mr Justice P. N. Prakash2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.06.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Crl.O.P.(MD)No.7325 of 2017 & Crl.M.P.(MD).No.4984 of 2017 Pavul Sugirtharaj : Petitioner/4th Accused Vs.

The State through Inspector of Police, Lalgudi Police Station, Lalgudi, Trichy District.

: Respondent/Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records pertaining to Crl.M.P.No.488/2017 in C.C.No.84/2011 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Lalgudi and set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.488/2017, in C.C.No.84/2011, dated 28.02.2017 and allow the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthumalai Raja For Respondent : Mr.K.Anbarasan Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioner is facing prosecution in C.C.No.84 of 2011 for offence under Sections 420, 464, 120(B), 109 and 506(ii) IPC. While so, the prosecution examined PW12 in chief on 20.09.2016. At that time, the accused did not cross-examine P.W.12, who is none other than the Sub Inspector of Police, who assisted the Inspector of Police in the investigation of the offence. After the prosecution side witness closed, the accused have to be examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. At that juncture, the accused filed Crl.M.P.No.488 of 2017 in C.C.No.84 of 2011, to recall PW12 for the purpose of crossexamination. The said petition has been dismissed by the Trial Court by the well consider order dated 28.02.2017. Challenging which, the accused is before this Court.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused submitted that if one opportunity is given to the accused to cross-examine

PW12, it would serve the interest of justice.

4. This Court gave its anxious consideration to the rival submissions. The fact remains PW12 is not an eyewitness to the incident. He has only assisted the Inspector of Police in the investigation of the witnesses. In fact, even in the petition filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C., the accused have clearly stated that the documents in question were submitted by PW1 himself though the Public Prosecutor and the same has been marked in the Court as exhibit. PW1 has also been subjected to cross-examination by the accused. In such circumstances, the evidence of PW12 with regard to the receipt of those alleged documents pales into insignificance.

5. In the result, this Court finds no infirmity in the order passed by the Court below warranting interference by this Court. The Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Record) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Lalgudi.

2.Inspector of Police, Lalgudi Police Station, Lalgudi, Trichy District.

+1cc to Mr.S.Muthumalai Raja Advocate in SR. No.60741 jikr js/SKN/RSK/SAR.2/27.06.2017/2P-4C Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.7325 of 2017 16.06.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/