Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/19975/2025disposed of

Suriya Kumari Radhakrishnan v. B.S.Kannan

2025-11-11Honourable Mr Justice Sunder Mohan5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 11.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN and Cr.MP(MD)No.16821 of 2025

1. Suriya Kumari Radhakrishnan,

2. Krithika Radhakrishnan ... Petitioners Vs.

B.S.Kannan, ... Respondent PRAYER :- This Petition is filed under Section 528 BNSS, to call for the records quash the complaint in Crl.MP.No.886 of 2025 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court I, Karur and the issual of the summons to the petitioners.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Prakash, Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Mahendra Prabu 1/5

ORDER

The petition is filed to quash the notice issued by the learned Magistrate, which states that the petitioners are called upon to answer the charges under Section 223 BNSS r/w. Section 198 of the BNSS.

2. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned complaint is an abuse of process of abuse of law as none of the offences alleged are made out as against the petitioners.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that they have nothing to do with the alleged offence of forgery, which is said to have committed by the other accused; that there is a dispute between the first accused and the defacto complainant; that the petitioners have no role in the alleged offence of forgery or cheating or any of the offences alleged in the complaint.

2/5

4. On perusal of the impugned notice and the complaint filed by the respondent, it is seen that the learned Magistrate has not taken cognizance of the complaint so far, as the case is numbered only as Crl.MP.No.886 of 2025 and the main case has not been numbered. It is also seen that the impugned notice is not happily worded and is bound to confuse the recipient. The learned Magistrates may therefore make it clear as to whether the notice/summons have been issued for a pre-cognizance enquiry. Since it can be inferred that the notice is only a pre-cognizance notice, this Court is not inclined to entertain the quash petition at this stage. It is for the learned Magistrate to consider if the cognizance of the offences can be taken and whether summons can be issued to the petitioners.

5. The petitioners may either appear in person or through a counsel and submit that the offences alleged are not made out as against the petitioners. It is needless to say that the learned Magistrate shall consider the objections and take a decision on cognizance. 3/5

6. With the above observations this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. It is needless to say that if the learned Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence and decides to issue summons to the petitioners, the petitioners are at liberty to approach this Court for quashing of the complaint, if the allegations do not attract the offences. Consequently, the connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 11.11.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No LS TO The Judicial Magistrate Court I, Karur.

4/5

SUNDER MOHAN,J.

LS CRL OP(MD) No.19975 of 2025 11.11.2025 5/5