← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/15979/2025withdrawn dismissed

Manikandan @ Jeeva Manikandan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Kovilpatti West

2025-09-23Honourable Mr Justice Sunder Mohan5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 23.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.(MD).No.15979 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.(MD).No.13034 of 2025 Manikandan @ Jeeva Manikandan ... Petitioner/Accused No.5 Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Kovilpatti West, Police Station, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.

(Crime No.743 of 2016) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Dineshkumar ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records pertaining to the S.C.No.56 of 2020 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court for the exclusive trial of PCR Act Cases, Thoothukudi and quash the same in respect of the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Anandakumar For R-1 : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor 1/5

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition is filed to quash the final report in S.C.No.56 of 2020, which was filed for the offences under Section 363, 294(b), 147, 148, 342, 323, 324, 307, 506(2), 149 of IPC, Section 3(2)(v), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on account of prior enmity, the petitioner along with others kidnapped the defacto complainant, attacked him with iron rods and wooden logs and threatened him with dire consequences; and they also humiliated him on account of his caste and thus committed the aforesaid offences.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegation against the petitioner is false; and that he has been falsely roped in this case as he is the friend of the other accused.

4. When this Court expressed that the points raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner are factual in nature and cannot be adjudicated in a quash petition, the learned counsel sought permission to withdraw this petition 2/5

and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. However, the learned counsel would submit that the alleged occurrence took place in the year 2016 and though the final report was filed in the year 2017, the impugned proceedings is pending before the Sessions Court for more than five years after taking cognizance; and that the Sessions Court may be directed to expedite the trial.

5. In view of the above submission, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Though ordinarily a direction cannot be issued to the Trial Court to complete the trial within a time frame, considering the fact that the alleged occurrence took place in the year 2016 and the case is pending before the Sessions Court for five years, this Court directs the Sessions Court to dispose of the trial as expeditiously as possible and in any event, not later than one year from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

23.09.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Lm 3/5

To 1.The Additional District and Sessions Court for the exclusive trial of PCR Act Cases, Thoothukudi.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kovilpatti West, Police Station, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.

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

4/5

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

Lm Crl.O.P(MD).No.15979 of 2025 23.09.2025 5/5