Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/18776/2025disposed of

C.Kannappan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Madagupatti

2025-10-28Honourable Mr Justice Sunder Mohan5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.(MD).No.18776 of 2025 and Crl.MP(MD).No.15602 of 2025 1.C.Kannappan 2.K.Chandra ... Petitioner / Accused No.4, 11 Vs.

1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Madagupatti, Police Station, Sivagangai District.

Crime No.222 of 2025. ... 1st Respondent / Complainant 2.Kalidass ... 2nd Respondent / Defacto Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records of the impugned FIR in Crime No.222 of 2025 dated 16.08.2025 on the file of the 1st respondent police and to quash the same as illegal and for consequential orders.

For Petitioners : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan For R1 : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/5

ORDER

This petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.222 of 2025, dated 16.08.2025 on the file of the 1st respondent Police, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 125, 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023.

2. The gist of the allegation in the impugned FIR is that on account of prior enmity, the petitioners had attacked the defacto complainant with sticks and iron rod and caused grievous injury to him, abused him in filthy language and also committed the offence of criminal intimidation.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that one of the accused in this case had lodged a counter complaint as against the defacto complainant and others, which was registered in Crime No.221 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 125, 115(2), 118(2) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023; that the dispute is essentially between the relatives; that the allegations are trivial in nature; and that the impugned FIR may be quashed.

2/5

4. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) would submit that the case in counter case would be investigated in accordance with PSO 566; and that a final report would be filed within a period of two months.

5. The impugned FIR cannot be quashed only because the counter complaint has been filed by the accused against the defacto complainant and others. It is needless to say that the first respondent shall comply with PSO 566 and the guidelines issued by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of T.Balaji and another Vs. The State in Crl.OP.Nos.4587 of 2024 etc. batch dated 08.08.2024 and file the final report within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 28.10.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Indu 3/5

To 1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Madagupatti, Police Station, Sivagangai District.

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

4/5

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

Indu Crl.O.P(MD).No.18776of 2025 28.10.2025 5/5