Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/21979/2022disposed of

Muthu Durai @ Durai v. The Superintendent Of Police

2022-12-14Honourable Mr Justice K.Murali Shankar5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.12.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR and Crl.M.P.(MD) No.15500 of 2022

1. Muthu Durai @ Durai,

2. Murugan,

3. John Jebakuttai,

4. Shanmugavel,

5. Rajakani,

6. Danial Raj,

7. Malaiyappan,

8. Veruthaiyan,

9. Petchimuthu,

10. Chinna Chokkaiya,

11. Murugan,

12. Poolaiya,

13. Chokkaiya,

14. Balamurugan,

15. Senthilvel,

16. Thangapandi,

17. Thangakani,

18. Murugan,

19. Vairamuthu,

20. Kani,

21. Rajivganthi,

22. Thangaraj, : Petitioners Vs 1/5

1. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

2. The Inspector of Police, Naraikinaru Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

: Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying this Court to direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner representation, dated 16.11.2022 and to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner and other villagers without assigning any reason. For Petitioners : Mr.V.Rajiv Rufus For Respondents : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking a direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioners' representation, dated 16.11.2022 and to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioners and other villagers without assigning any reason.

2.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents would submit that in this case, totally fifty three accused including the petitioners were arrayed as accused. But, so far alteration report 2/5

was not filed. As of now, there is no records to show that the petitioners were made as accused. It is not in dispute that twenty nine accused in the above case had already filed a petition seeking to quash the FIR against them and the same was ordered by this court. Further he would submit that the respondent police had recorded the statement of the witnesses wherein, the witnesses have stated about the involvement of the petitioners herein, in the alleged occurrence.

3.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners will take steps to file a petition for quash of FIR. 4.Recording the said submission, this criminal original petition is disposed of. The petitioners are at liberty to file a petition seeking quash of FIR, if so advised. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 14.12.2022 Internet:Yes Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order lr 3/5

1. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

2. The Inspector of Police, Naraikinaru Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

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

4/5

K.MURALI SHANKAR , J.

lr 14.12.2022 5/5