Babu @ Ibrahim Babu v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL CRL. OP(MD) No.6540 of 2025 and CRL.MP(MD) No.4775 of 2025 Babu @ Ibrahim Babu ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch-II, Madurai City.

2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Sivagangai.

3. Priyanka

4. Saranya ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to call for the entire records to the F.I.R in summon sent by the 1st respondent dated 29.03.2025 in C.No.05/Insp-CCB-II/XI-Sec/MC/2025 and quash the same as illegal.

Page No. 1 of 4

For Petitioner : Mr.P. Muthusaravanan For R1 & R2 : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

This petition has been filed by the petitioner to quash the summon issued by the 1st respondent dated 29.03.2025 in C.No.05/Insp-CCBII/XI-Sec/MC/2025.

2. According to the petitioner, the respondents no.3 and 4 lodged a complaint against the petitioner before the 2nd respondent. In fact, the same respondents already lodged complaint before the City Crime Branch, Madurai and the same is pending. While so, for the same set of allegations, the same respondents lodged complaint before the 2nd respondent and issued summon. Therefore, the summon has to be quashed.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents no.1 and 2 would submit that based on the complaint given by the respondents no.3 and 4, enquiry is pending. If the petitioner appears for enquiry, they will conduct enquiry and dispose of the same in Page No. 2 of 4

accordance with law.

4. Heard both sides and perused the records.

5. There are no grounds to quash the summon. However, the grievance of the petitioner is that already for the same complaint, the same respondents lodged a complaint before the City Crime Branch, Madurai and the same is pending. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to appear before the 2nd respondent and state all the facts before the 2nd respondent, so that they can come to a conclusion. In view of the same, this Court directs the petitioner to appear before the 2nd respondent and thereafter, the 2nd respondent has to consider the representation of the petitioner along with the complaint and dispose of the above said complaint of the respondents no.3 and 4.

6. With the above said observation and direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

09.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Page No. 3 of 4

Internet : Yes / No Mac P.DHANABAL, J.

Mac To

1. The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch II, Madurai City.

2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Sivagangai.

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

CRL. OP(MD) No.6540 of 2025 9.04.2025 Page No. 4 of 4