Ramkumar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thirumangalam Town
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 16.12.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.19735 of 2025 1.Ramkumar 2.Sankar 3.Vignesh 4.Kesavan 5.Balachandar 6.Charlas Devaraj 7.Mohan 8.Balamurali 9.Prakash 10.David Durai 11.Alagarsamy 12.Manipandi 13.Tamilmani 14.Vennila ... Petitioners 1/6
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Tirumangalam Town Police Station, Madurai.
(Crime No.5 of 2025) 2.Palpandi ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records pertaining to the Crime No.5 of 2025 dated 04.01.2025 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal. For Petitioners : Mr.R.Mathava Selvam, Advocate For R1 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
ORDER
Seeking to quash the impugned First Information Report in Crime No.5 of 2025 dated 04.01.2025 on the file of the first respondent police, this Criminal Original Petition has been filed.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the first petitioner is the Secretary and the other petitioners are members of the Indian 2/6
Youth Nadar Association, a registered society bearing Registration No.94 of 1996. At the instance of a third party, who is the de-facto complainant, the present FIR has been registered against the petitioners. It was contended that the de-facto complainant has no connection whatsoever with the said Federation and that the first respondent police, having become pawns in the hands of the second respondent, have lodged the FIR without any basis. It was further submitted that no prima facie case has been made out against any of the petitioners, and therefore, the learned counsel sought the indulgence of this Court to quash the FIR in Crime No.5 of 2025.
4. Per contra, Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), on instructions, submitted that the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners are baseless. According to him, the de-facto complainant is, in fact, the General Secretary of the said Youth Federation and in that capacity, he had lodged the complaint with respect to the sale of property belonging to the Federation by the petitioners, who are in no way connected with the said Federation. It was further submitted that the first petitioner is not the Secretary and that the other petitioners are not members of the said Federation. Earlier, the first petitioner's father had served as the Secretary of the Federation, and after his demise, without any authority or 3/6
proper resolution, the petitioners allegedly concocted a resolution claiming that the first petitioner was elected as Secretary and on that basis, created an encumbrance over the property belonging to the Federation. It was further submitted that even assuming the petitioners' claim to be true, only an FIR has been registered and the investigation has just commenced, and therefore, the petitioners can very well produce all relevant documents before the Investigating Officer to substantiate their claim, who will consider the same and proceed with the investigation in accordance with law.
5. In view of the above submissions, the petitioners are directed to produce all necessary documents substantiating their claim that they are the office-bearers of the said Youth Federation and that the de-facto complainant is not the General Secretary of the said Federation before the Investigating Officer. Upon receipt of such documents, the Investigating Officer shall examine the genuineness of the documents produced by the respective parties. The Investigating Officer is also directed to call upon the de-facto complainant to produce necessary documents to prove his claim that he is the General Secretary of the said Youth Federation. After perusal of all the documents submitted by either party, the Investigating Officer shall proceed with the investigation in accordance with law.
4/6
6. It is made clear that the learned counsel for the petitioners has placed certain facts before this Court which are disputed by the learned Government Advocate. Since it is a settled proposition of law that this Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., cannot go into the disputed facts or conduct a full-fledged trial, the respondent police is directed to adhere to the directions issued by this Court and proceed with the investigation in accordance with law.
7. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 16.12.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No mkn To 1.The Inspector of Police, Tirumangalam Town Police Station, Madurai.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
mkn and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.19735 of 2025 16.12.2025 6/6