Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/15227/2019allowed

Celine Jeba Swis Aron v. The Inspector Of Police

2019-11-15Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan2 pages

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15227 of 2019 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.11.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15227 of 2019 and Crl.M.P (MD) Nos. 9118 & 9119 of 2019 Celine Jeba Swis Aron ... Petitioner/A2 Vs.

1. The State of rep by, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Kanyakumari Police Station, Kanyakumari, Kanyakumari District.

(In Crime No. 645 of 2015)

2. A.Muthuraj Inspector of Police (Circle) Kanyakumari Police Station, Kanyakumari, Kanyakumari District.

... Respondents Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to call for the records of the charge sheet in C.C.No. 121 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District and quash the same as illegal in respect of the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.N. Jothivel For Respondents : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash final report filed by the respondent police which has been taken on file in C.C.No. 121 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

2. The final report has been filed against the petitioner for an alleged offences under sections 3, 4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act 1956.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case both the complainant as well as the investigating officer https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15227 of 2019 are the same.

4.It can be seen from records that the First Information Report was registered by the second respondent and he is conducting the investigation and he has also filed the final report. Therefore the very same investigation in this case is vitiated. This case is squarely covered by the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in Mohan Lal- vs- The State of Punjab in Criminal Appeal No.1880 of 201 1, wherein the Honourable Supreme Court has categorically held that the foundation of the fair trial postulates that the informant and the investigator must not be the same person.

5. In view of the above the final report filed by the respondent police in C.C.No. 121 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District is hereby quashed and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Kanyakumari Police Station, Kanyakumari, Kanyakumari District.

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

KSA TE : 07/01/2020 : 2P/4C Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15227 of 2019 15.11.2019 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2