IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27.07.2009 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN Crl.O.P.No.16937 of 2007 and M.P.No.1 of 2007 S.Selvam .. Petitioner. Versus The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Erode South Police Staion, Erode. .. Respondent Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to call for the records relating to the C.C.No.124 of 2007 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Erode and to quash the same. For Petitioner : M/s. R.Krishanamurthy (No appearance) For Respondent : Mr. R.Muniappa raj Government Advocate (Crl. Side) O R D E R
The petitioner has filed the above Criminal Original Petition to call for the records relating to the C.C.No.124 of 2007 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Erode and quash the same.
2. The prosecution case is as follows:
A Matron, Mrs.Pushpa Rani, working in the Ambedkar Girls Hostel, Erode sold the rice and other provision items to third persons, and received illegal gratification. She is accused No.1 in the said prosecution case. She was also suspended from service due to irregularities on 18.07.2006. The said Matron had accumulated the rice meant for hostel students, to the tune of 400kg and stored it secretely. The second accused, co-operated with the first accused for the said offence. The third accused had also supported the first and second accused and had hidden the rice. In this way, all the accused 1, 2 & 3, jointly, with common intention to steal the rice and other provisions in Hostel, committed an offence under Sections 380 and 414 of IPC. The same was registered as Crime No.294 of 2006 on the file of the respondent police.
3. After enquiry, charge sheet was filed and the learned Magistrate has taken the case on his file as C.C.No.124 of 2007, and issued summons to the accused persons.
4. The petitioner/accused No.3 has contended that he has not colluded with accused No.1 in any way and that there was no connection between him and accused No.1. The petitioner submits that he is a textile business coolie and that A2 is the petitioner’s brother. It is further alleged by the petitioner that the respondent police had taken him to police station and under threat, he was forced to sign some blank papers. The petitioner further alleges that he has never given such a statement as produced by the prosecution in the charge sheet before the concerned Court. It is alleged that the petitioner never knew A1 and that A2 never asked him to keep the rice bags. Further, the petitioner has never given any cash to A1. As such, the petitioner contends that he has been falsely charged under Section 414 of IPC of having received the stolen property. It is further alleged that the petitioner was not arrested before the filing of charge sheet to the learned Court.
5. The petitioner submits that the theft of rice took place on 31.07.2006, as per the First Information Report, at about 11.30 p.m. A2 was arrested on 01.08.2006 under section 380 of IPC and remanded to judicial custody on the same day; A1 was enlarged on anticipatory bail on 07.08.2006. The petitioner contends that the stolen rice which was TNCSC PDS Rice has, so far, not been sent either to get confirmation about the stolen rice being a PDS rice or not. The petitioner was arrested on 30.03.2007, ie., after a lapse of 8 months from the date of the said occurrence, under Section 414 of IPC. The petitioner further contends that the allegation of the prosecution that A2 had carried 8 bags of stolen rice on his shoulder, is highly incredulous and could not be believed. The petitioner, therefore, prays for the quashing of complaint in C.C.No.124 of 2007, pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Erode.
6. The Government Advocate (Crl. Side) argued the case on behalf of the respondent. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the argument of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), the Court is of the opinion that the public rice stolen is meant for the welfare of poor Adi Dravidas Hostel Students. Therefore, in the interest of public and to restore confidence in the minds of a large section of students, the matter has got to be tried to come to a correct conclusion. Hence, the Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings in C.C.No.124 of 2007 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Erode.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition No.16937 of 2007 is dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
mra
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
Erode South Police Staion,
Erode.
2. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court,
Madras