← Library
Madras High CourtCRL RC(MD)/413/2026disposed of

Subramani @ Siva v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Airport

2026-03-04Honourable Mrs Justice L.Victoria Gowri5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Crl.RC.(MD).No.413 of 2026 Subramani @ Siva ... Petitioner / Sole Accused Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Airport Police Station, Trichy District.

(Crime No.434/2023) ... 1st Respondent / Complainant Prayer : Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 438 r/w 442 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records relating to the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate VI, Tiruchirappalli in Cr.MP.No. 25697/2023 dated 30.08.2023 and set aside the same by allowing this revision petition.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Azhagesh For Respondent : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/5

ORDER

Seeking to set aside the order passed by the learned Trial Court in Crl.M.P.No.25967 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Thiruchirapalli, this Criminal Revision case is filed.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he had filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.25967 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Thiruchirapalli, under section 451 of Cr.P.C., 1973, praying to release his passport. However, the same was dismissed by the learned Judicial Magistrate by the impugned order dated 30.08.2023. Challenging the same, this Criminal Revision case is filed.

3. The learned Government Advocate Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar submitted that the petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands. The address given by the petitioner in his affidavit itself is false. In this regard, the Village Administrative Officer of Nallambal Samudram village, Thirumayam Taluk, had certified that the address given by the petitioner is not the address where the petitioner is residing in this case. That apart, he categorically contended that the 2/5

case is one of a fake passport in which the supporting documents had revealed that the petitioner's name is different, and his father's name is also different, and hence, there is no infirmity in the order passed by the learned Trial Court.

4. Heard the learned counsels on either side and carefully perused the materials available on record.

5. A careful perusal of the impugned order would make it clear that there is no infirmity in the same. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he would like to limit his relief before this Court so as to direct the respondent police to file a final report as expeditiously as possible since the case was registered as early as in the year 2023.

6. In view of the said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent police is directed to conclude the investigation as expeditiously as possible within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and file a final report. On filing of the final report, the learned Judicial Magistrate 3/5

No.VI is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of six months from the date of taking cognizance.

7. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

04.03.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Sml To 1.The Judicial Magistrate VI, Tiruchirappalli.

2. The Inspector of Police, Airport Police Station, Trichy District.

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

4/5

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

Sml CRL RC(MD)No.413 of 2026 04.03.2026 5/5