Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10236/2022disposed of

Inbaraj v. The Inspector Of Police

2024-02-26Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26.02.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10236 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.(MD).No.6409 of 2022 Inbaraj ... Petitioner/ Accused No.33 Vs.

1.The Inspector of Police, Koodankulam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.343 of 2012) 2.Thirumurugan, Sub Inspector of Police, Koodankulam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

...Respondents

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records in Crime No.343 of 2012 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned and allow this Criminal Original Petition.

For petitioner : Mr.C.K.M.Appaji For R-1 : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/5

O RDER This petition has been filed seeking to quash the FIR in Crime No.343 of 2012 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 353, 431, 188 IPC r/w 144 Cr.P.C. 291, 294(b), 121, 121 (A), 124(A), 307 r/w 149 IPC and Section 3 of the TNPPDL Act and Section 4 of the E.S. Act, 1908 pending on the file of the first respondent Police insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.09.2012 at about 1.00 P.M., 49 named accused persons along with 100 unknown accused persons assembled with dangerous weapons and petrol bomb at Koodankulam way junction and thereby, protested as against the functioning of Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant and also protested as against the Government of India. It is further alleged that the accused persons violated the Order promulgated under Section 144 Cr.P.C., passed by the District Collector, Tirunelveli and damaged the public properties and also threw the petrol bomb as against the Police Officials. Hence the complaint.

2/5

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent Police has included the petitioner's name in the FIR without considering the real fact. He would further submit that there is no specific overtact against the petitioner

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the first respondent Police would submit that there are materials available to proceed with the case as against the petitioner herein and at the threshold, the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed and hence, he would pray to dismiss the present petition.

5. On a reading of the FIR, there appears to be some materials for the investigation to proceed. Interfering with the investigation, which is at an infancy stage under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, will be against the law laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. However, the first respondent Police is directed to conclude the 3/5

investigation in Crime No.343 of 2012 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 26.02.2024 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No TSG To 1.The Inspector of Police, Koodankulam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.343 of 2012) 2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Koodankulam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

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

4/5

M.DHANDAPANI. J.

TSG 26.02.2024 5/5