{"id":146605,"date":"2003-10-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-10-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003"},"modified":"2018-08-17T22:43:39","modified_gmt":"2018-08-17T17:13:39","slug":"raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003","title":{"rendered":"Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS           \n\nDATED: 14\/10\/2003  \n\nCORAM   \n\nTHE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE V.KANAGARAJ           \n\nCRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.19498 OF 2002       \nAND  \nCRL.M.P.No.7926 OF 2002.   \n\n\nRaghunath V.Nair                       ... Petitioner\n\n-Vs-\n\nState, by The Inspector of Police\nJ5 Shastri Nagar Police Station,\nChennai.                                ... Respondent\n\nP.H.Menon  \nManaging Director,\nM\/s.Sanguino Implex Pvt.Ltd.,\nNo.111, Velacherry Main Road, \nChennai-600 032.                        ... Intervener\n\n(Intervener brought on record\nas per the Order of the Court\ndated 9.9.2002 made in \nCrl.M.P.No.8783\/2002) \n\n        Criminal Original Petition filed under Section  482  of  the  Code  of\nCriminal Procedure for the relief as stated therein.\n\n\n!For Petitioner:  Mr.B.S.Raman\n\n^For Respondent:  Mr.A.N.Thambidurai \n                Govt.Advocate(Cri.Side)\n\nFor intervener:  Mr.T.K.Rajasekaran\n                Mr.P.Karlmarx\n\n\n:O R D E R \n<\/pre>\n
                This Criminal Original Petition has been filed praying to call
\nfor the records on the file of the respondent  J5,  Sastri  Bhavan  Police  in
\ntheir Crime No.839 of 2002 and quash the same.\n<\/p>\n
                2.The case of the petitioner is that he is working  as  Branch
\nManager  in  TATA Finance limited, a reputed Non Banking Financial Institution
\nwhich  is  engaged  in  the  business  of   extending   finance   under   Hire
\nPurchase\/Lease  Scheme;  that M\/s Sanguino Impex P Ltd.approached TATA Finance
\nLimited for 100% finance for being given use of a  Ford  Escort  Car  under  a
\nlease  agreement  and  a lease agreement was entered into between TATA Finance
\nlimited and M\/s Sanguino Impex P.  Ltd.  on 12.5.1999 and a new Ford  Car  was
\npurchased by Tata Finance limited for a sum of Rs.7,59,988\/- and given for the
\nuse  of M\/s Sanguino Impex P.Ltd.; that as per the terms and conditions of the
\nagreement between the parties, the  lease  was  for  a  period  of  60  months
\ncommencing  from  12.3.199 9 to 12.4.2004; that the lessee was liable to pay a
\nsum of Rs.18,170\/- per month for the first 59 months and Rs.17,792.79 for  the
\n60th  month  as  lease rental every month to have the use of the car; that the
\nagreement in Clause 23 provides refers the TATA Finance Limited  as  owner  of
\nthe  vehicle  which  has  been  given  for  the  use  of  the lessee under the
\nagreement, being entitled to repossess the same in the  event  of  the  lessee
\ndefaulting  in  payment  of  dues; that as provided in the agreement, the 1999
\nModel Ford Escort Car was registered in the name of M\/s.Sanguino Impex Private
\nLimited with Registration No.PY-01-M-19 60; that the said  M\/s.Sanguino  Impex
\nPrivate  limited  committed a series of defaults and failed to pay the monthly
\nlease instalments; that various cheques issued by them  got  dishonoured  when
\npresented  for payment; that the Head Office of TATA Finance Limited at Mumbai
\nput M\/ s.Sanguino Impex Private Limited on notice by  letter  dated  18.6.2002
\nthat  the  lessee  was in default in payment of dues, and if the dues were not
\ncleared promptly, the said company would be forced to act under the  terms  of
\nthe  agreement;  that  following the lessees failure to take any step to clear
\nthe dues, the Head Office  TATA  Finance  Limited  at  Mumbai  authorised  the
\nrepossession  of  the leased vehicle and it was repossessed on 18.7.2002; that
\nas on the date of repossession, four monthly instalments viz.    12.4.2002  to
\n12.7.2002  remained  unpaid  with  default interest; that the repossession has
\nbeen intimated to the police authorities on the same day.\n<\/p>\n
                3.  The further case of the petitioner is  that  the  car  was
\nbeing  driven  by  one  Mr.P.H.Menon, a Director in M\/s.Sanguino Impex Private
\nLimited at the time of its being repossessed on 18.7.2002, who is  well  aware
\nof  the  fact  of non-payment of dues; that the said Mr.P.H.Menon gave a false
\ncomplaint on 19.7.2002 alleging that on 18.7.2002 in the morning, when he  was
\nproceeding  from  his resident to his office, the petitioner, one Ravi and two
\nunnamed others stopped his car and the petitioner abused the  informant;  that
\nit is al leged that certain valuables including Rs.16,000\/- in cash is said to
\nbe kept by him in the car and he has requested that the car and his properties
\nmay  be  restored  to  him;  that the respondent police have registered a case
\nagainst the petitioner herein under Sections 395 and  506(II)  IPC;  that  the
\ninformant  added  his name to the list of accused with a view to harass him as
\nhe is the Branch Manager of TATA Finance Limited; that  the  petitioner  is  a
\nresponsible officer in a reputed company and he has been falsely implicated in
\nthe  FIR  for collateral reasons of the informant trying to bargain favourable
\nterms with the company.  Hence, the above Criminal Original petition has  been
\nfiled for the relief extracted supra.\n<\/p>\n
                4.   During arguments, the learned counsel appearing on behalf
\nof the petitioner, besides reiterating the  facts  as  pleaded  in  the  above
\ncriminal original petition, would also cite the following judgments:\n<\/p>\n
1) 2001(4)CTC 102 (CHARANJIT SINGH CHADHA AND OTHERS vs.  SUDHIR MEHRA)<\/a>\n<\/p>\n
2) 1996  SCC (Cri) 281 (K.A.MATHAI ALIAS BABU AND ANOTHER vs.  KORA BIBBIKUTTY
\nAND ANOTHER)\n<\/p>\n
3) 1979 SCC (Cri) 987 (SARDAR TRILOK SINGH AND OTHERS vs.  SATYA DEO TRIPATHI)<\/a>            <\/p>\n
                5.  In the first judgment cited  above,  in  a  case  of  hire
\npurchase  agreement  containing a clause empowering the owner to repossess the
\nvehicle in case of default by hirer and on the hirer committing  default,  the
\nowner repossessed the vehicle in which the Honourable Apex Court has held:\n<\/p>\n
“The  hire-purchase  agreement  in  law  is  an executory contract of sale and
\nconfers no right in rem on hirer until the  conditions  for  transfer  of  the
\nproperty to  him have been fulfilled.  Therefore, the repossession of goods as
\nper the term of the agreement may not amount to any  criminal  offence.    The
\nagreement  specifically  gave  authority  to  the appellants to re-possess the
\nvehicle and their agents have been given the right to enter  any  property  or
\nbuilding wherein  the  motor  vehicle  was  likely to be kept.  Under the hire
\npurchase agreement, the appellants have continued to  be  the  owners  of  the
\nvehicle  and even if the entire allegations against them are taken as true, no
\noffence was  made  out  against  them  ….    The  complaint  and  any  other
\nproceedings initiated pursuant to such complaint are quashed.”\n<\/p>\n
                6.   In the second judgment cited above, in a case where a bus
\npurchased by A.2 under a hire-purchase agreement was sold to  the  complainant
\nand  when the complainant defaulted in payment of instalment to the financier,
\nthe financier took possession of the bus with the help of A.1 and A.2  and  in
\nthis case, the Honourable apex Court held:\n<\/p>\n
“Financer  has  right  to  resume  possession  even  if the agreement does not
\ncontain a clause of resumption of possession and the offence of theft not made
\nout.”\n<\/p>\n
                7.  In the third judgment cited above, in a case  wherein  the
\ntruck  sold  under  hire-purchase  agreement  was  seized  by the financier on
\ndefault in payment of instalment and buyer launched  criminal  prosecution  in
\nwhich the Honourable Apex Court held:\n<\/p>\n
“The launching of criminal prosecution by the buyer was an abuse of process of
\nthe court since the dispute was essentially of a civil nature.”\n<\/p>\n
Citing  the above judgments, the learned counsel for the petitioner would pray
\nto the relief extracted supra.\n<\/p>\n
                8.     On    the    contrary,     on     behalf     of     the
\nintervener\/defactocomplainant, the learned counsel would submit that so far 40
\nmonthly  instalments  have been paid out of sixty instalments and due to three
\nmonths’ paltry random default, the petitioner has foreclosed the agreement and
\ntried to re-possess the car that too by force; that on the  fateful  day  i.e.
\non  18.7.2002, at around 10.45 a.m., the petitioner along with three other men
\ncame in a black  Ambassador  car  and  waylaid  the  defacto-complainant  near
\nTheosophical  Society,  Besant  Avenue Road, Adyar, chennai and the petitioner
\nalong with one Ravi and other persons pulled the  defacto-complainant  out  of
\nhis  car  forcibly  and  slugged  on his neck, shoulder, stomach with enormous
\nforce and scolded him in filthy language at the instance  of  the  petitioner.
\nThe  learned  counsel  would further submit that the accused persons have also
\nrobbed the following items from the defacto-complainant:\n<\/p>\n
1.Samsung Stereo C.D.changer (Home Theatre)\n<\/p>\n
2.Oriental Bank of Commerce Cheque Book\n<\/p>\n
3.Standard Chartered Bank Cheque Book\n<\/p>\n
4.ICICI Bank cheque book\n<\/p>\n
5.Standard Chartered Bank ATM Card\n<\/p>\n
6.ICICI Bank ATM Card\n<\/p>\n
7.Americal Express Credit Card\n<\/p>\n
8.Office Bag containing files\n<\/p>\n
9.Cash of Rs.15,000\/= in office bag and Rs.1,500\/- in purse.\n<\/p>\n
10.House Keys bunch\n<\/p>\n
11.Office Keys bunch\n<\/p>\n
12.Nokia Battery Charger\n<\/p>\n
13.Nokia Cell\n<\/p>\n
14.Bible and other Misc.items\n<\/p>\n
15.Company Rubber Stamps.\n<\/p>\n
                9.  The learned  counsel  for  the  intervener  would  further
\nsubmit  that scores of rulings hold that an FIR, even concise in nature ,shall
\nnot be quashed by the High Courts exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of
\nthe Code of Criminal Procedure, if Courts are of the view that a  prima  facie
\noffence  is made out and it is the trial Court which ought to decide the same;
\nthat in UNION OF INDIA vs.    BAJANLAL  reported  in  AIR  1992  SC  604,  the
\nHonourable  Apex  Court  has  held  that  `the  Courts  have  to  order for an
\ninvestigation under Section 156 Cr.P.C., if the allegations  in  the  FIR  and
\nother  materials accompanying FIR discloses commission of cognizable offence’;
\nthat since in the case hand, the  FIR  discloses  a  cognizable  offence,  the
\nquestion  of quashing the same does not at all arise and would pray to dismiss
\nthe above criminal original petition.\n<\/p>\n
                10.  On  the  part  of  the  respondent  Police,  the  learned
\nGovernment  Advocate  on  the  criminal  side  would  submit that based on the
\ncomplaint lodged by the intervener\/defacto-complainant, the respondent  Police
\nhaving  registered  the  case,  are  proceeding  with  the  investigation  and
\ntherefore would pray to dismiss the  above  criminal  original  petition  thus
\npermitting  the Investigating Officer to have a free and fair investigation in
\nthe matter.\n<\/p>\n
                11.  In consideration of the materials placed  on  record  and
\nupon  hearing  the  learned  counsel  for  all  the  parties, the petitioner’s
\nfinancier company  is  alleged  to  have  made  financial  assistance  to  the
\ndefacto-complainant  to purchase a car on certain terms and conditions and the
\nmode of repayment etc.  On the part of the petitioner,  it  would  further  be
\nsubmitted  that there are conditional clauses inserted in the agreement to the
\neffect that in case of default in the repayment, the  financier  would  become
\nthe  owner  of the vehicle further becoming entitled to possession of the same
\nand giving effect to the said clause, since the defacto-complainant  committed
\nthe default in the payment, they have taken possession of the vehicle.\n<\/p>\n
                12.   On  the  part  of  the  defacto-complainant, it would be
\nsubmitted that till date forty instalments have been paid without any  default
\nand  due to some financial constraints, he could not make the payment only for
\nthe last three instalments and in such  circumstances,  the  petitioner  along
\nwith  one Ravi and engaging some unruly elements not only waylaid the vehicle,
\nbut also assaulted him and took the vehicle and the accused have  also  robbed
\nof  his articles and cash as a result of which, for his personal sufferings of
\nassault and for the acts perpetrated in deliberately snatching  not  only  the
\nvehicle  from  out  of his possession but also his valuable articles, engaging
\nunruly elements, he has given a complaint before the respondent police  within
\nwhose jurisdiction the vehicle had been snatched.\n<\/p>\n
                13.   In the above circumstances, the points for determination
\nare<\/p>\n
1.`whether the registering of  the  case  by  the  respondent  Police  on  the
\ncomplaint  of  the  defacto-complainant is just and proper or whether the same
\nhas to be quashed as it is sought for on the part of the petitioner?’<\/p>\n
2.`whether pursuant to this dispute, the act  admittedly  perpetrated  on  the
\npart  of the petitioner and other accused in taking forcible possession of the
\nvehicle and other valuable articles from the defactocomplainant,  is  just  or
\nproper  and  whether  the  same  could be ratified by the Court or whether the
\npetitioner and other accused  persons  become  liable  to  be  dealt  with  in
\naccordance with the penal provisions of law?’\n<\/p>\n
                14.  It may be the case of the petitioner finance company that
\nthere  was  a  written  agreement  entered  into in between themselves and the
\ndefacto-complainant, according to which if there are defaults in the repayment
\nof schedule agreed upon, the  petitioner’s  finance  company  would  not  only
\nbecome the full-fledged owner of the vehicle but also would become entitled to
\nget possession of the same.  But, when the defacto-complainant submits that he
\nalready  paid  forty  instalments,  even  though  he  agrees  to the terms and
\nconditions of agreement, is it proper on the part of the petitioner’s  finance
\ncompany  to  have acted in the manner alleged in taking forcible possession of
\nnot only the vehicle, which is subject to the agreement  but  also  the  other
\nvaluable articles mentioned in the complaint.\n<\/p>\n
                15.   Needless to mention that we are in a society governed by
\nlaws and for any claim made, only the proper forums established by law  should
\nbe  resorted  to for remedy and the rule being that in matters of such nature,
\nsince there is a  dispute  between  the  parties,  it  would  have  been  only
\nappropriate  on the part of the petitioner’s finance company to have initiated
\ncivil proceedings  either  for  the  recovery  of  the  money  or  for  taking
\npossession  of  the  vehicle as it is alleged to have been contemplated in the
\nagreement and in such cases, the decision of the civil Court will be final.\n<\/p>\n
                16.  Even regarding taking possession of the  vehicle,  it  is
\nthe  same civil court which could make an order and the rule in this regard is
\nexcept by due process of law and by the procedures established by law,  by  no
\nother  means,  parties  could take it for granted that they could take the law
\ninto their own hands and do things accordingly laying emphasis on the terms of
\nagreement entered into by parties particularly when a major compliance of  the
\nsame  is  claimed  by  the  other  side  and therefore the manner in which the
\npetitioner and other accused have acted in deliberately taking  possession  of
\nnot  only  the said vehicle but other valuable articles further assaulting the
\ndefactocomplainant is  undoubtedly  illegal  and  the  respondent  police  are
\nperfectly   right   in   registering   the   case  on  the  complaint  of  the
\ndefactocomplainant further taking up the same for investigation.\n<\/p>\n
                17.  It is not only the vehicle which is focussed on the  part
\nof  the  petitioner  herein  which is said to be under the lease agreement but
\nalso 15 items of articles have been specifically mentioned in the complaint by
\nthe intervener to have been robbed from him besides being assaulted black  and
\nblue  until  he  fell  in  giddiness  and  ultimately  two unknown persons who
\nwitnessed the  entire  scene  which  occurred  in  the  street  have  put  the
\ncomplainant  into  an  auto  and  sent him resulting in the complainant taking
\ntreatment in a private nursing home  besides  suffering  physical  and  mental
\nsufferings, agony and affliction.\n<\/p>\n
                18.   In  the  whole of the act perpetrated on the part of the
\naccused named in the complaint, the act of seizing of  the  vehicle  which  is
\nfocussed in the petition becomes eclipsed in view of the alleged commission of
\ngreater criminal offences such as assault, robbery, criminal intimidation etc.
\nand  this  Court  is not able to find reasons in the manner in which the above
\ncriminal original petition has been filed on the part of the petitioner who is
\none of the accused as though the seizure of the  vehicle  in  question  was  a
\nsmooth  transaction  and nothing else had happened and hence needless to again
\npoint out that the gruesome act alleged to have been perpetrated in the middle
\nof  the  street  as  an  ambush  engaging  unruly  elements,  harping  on  the
\ncomplainant  and unleashing all methods of criminal activities thus taking the
\nlaw into their own hands, have culminated not  only  in  the  lodging  of  the
\ncomplaint  by  the  complainant  but  also  registering  the case based on the
\ncomplaint by the intervener in the respondent’s  Cr.No.839  of  2002  for  the
\ncommission  of  the  offences  punishable  under Sections 395 and 506(II) IPC.
\nWhile such being the facts and circumstances encircling the case registered by
\nthe respondent against the accused therein, the petitioner, as though  nothing
\nhad  happened  and  burking  all those facts regarding the perpetration of the
\ncrime, as alleged in the complaint, without  even  offering  any  explanation,
\nonly  alleging that it is a false complaint, has come forward to pray to quash
\nthe same which cannot be done in law.\n<\/p>\n
                19.  So far as the judgments cited on  behalf  of  the  second
\npetitioner\/financier  are concerned, in the first judgment cited above, it had
\nbeen brought to the notice of the Honourable Supreme  Court  that  the  cheque
\nissued  by  the hirer for a sum of Rs.84,000\/= was dishonoured by the bank and
\nthe financier had  filed  a  criminal  complaint  under  Section  138  of  the
\nNegotiable  Instruments  Act wherein the Honourable Apex Court being convinced
\nof the default committed by the hirer has rightly held that there had been  no
\nelement  of  theft  or  dishonest  intention  either  for  wrongful  gains for
\nthemselves or to  cause  wrongful  loss  to  the  hirer  since  the  dishonest
\nintention  which is essential element to constitute an offence of theft cannot
\nbe attributed to a person exercising his right under the agreement of  default
\nof  payment and therefore since the financier continued to be the owner of the
\nvehicle and in right exercise of his authority to repossess the vehicle  under
\nthe  hire  purchase  agreement  he  has taken the vehicle, no offence of theft
\ncould be contemplated against him.\n<\/p>\n
                20.  But, this position as found by the Honourable Apex  Court
\nin  the said judgments is not prevalent in the case in hand since primarily on
\nthe part of the petitioner’s finance company, no evidence has been placed in a
\nreliable  manner  that  they  have  at  least   issued   a   notice   to   the
\ndefacto-complainant  nor  indicating  anywhere  that  he  is  in default or in
\narrears of payment of the monthly instalments.  While such being  the  factual
\nposition  of  the  case, the propositions held by the Honourable Apex Court in
\nthe second and third judgments cited above also do not  become  applicable  to
\nthe case in hand, which has to be dealt with on different parlance.\n<\/p>\n
                21.   In the above circumstances, yet another important aspect
\nawaiting vital consideration in the case in hand is that it is  not  only  the
\nvehicle  but  also  the  other  articles, as mentioned in the complaint of the
\ndefacto-complainant, have been taken forcible possession of by the accused for
\nwhich  the  petitioner’s  finance  company  has   absolutely   no   right   or
\nauthorisation  in  any manner and it is not only a frontal illegality but also
\nan atrocious act committed on the part of the  accused  taking  the  law  into
\ntheir own hands.\n<\/p>\n
                22.   Therefore,  though this Court is in perfect agreement of
\nthe propositions held by the Honourable Apex  Court  in  the  judgments  cited
\nabove,  still,  the  facts  and  circumstances encircling the case in hand are
\nentirely different in the sense that most part of the  instalments  have  been
\npaid by the defacto-complainant.  Therefore, the only conclusion that could be
\narrived at regarding the claim of the petitioner’s company is that the dispute
\nhas  to  be resolved by the Court of original civil jurisdiction without which
\nthe petitioner’s company cannot indulge in such acts as it had perpetrated  on
\nthe  date  of occurrence in forcibly taking possession of not only the vehicle
\nbut also the other articles of  the  defacto-complainant  which  are  lawfully
\nbelonging  him over which admittedly the petitioner’s finance company does not
\nhave any right and hence it is only proper  on  the  part  of  the  police  to
\nregister the case and investigate in order to give a disposal to the complaint
\nof the  defacto-complainant.    In these circumstances, the legal propositions
\nvalidly held by the Honourable Supreme  Court  ,  cannot,  in  any  manner  be
\napplied to the facts of the case in hand.\n<\/p>\n
                23.   In  fact,  the  criminal  complaint  lodged and the case
\nregistered by the respondent Police deserves a thorough  investigation  to  be
\nheld  following  all  such  procedures as laid down under the Code of Criminal
\nProcedure.\n<\/p>\n
                24.  In the recent  judgment  of  the  Honourable  Apex  Court
\ndelivered in  UNION OF INDIA vs.  PRAKASH P.HINDUJA AND ANOTHER<\/a> reported in IV
\n(20 03) Supreme Laws Today 335, the Honourable  Apex  Court,  considering  the
\npoint  that  `whether  the  High  Court can exercise its inherent powers under
\nSection 482  of  the  Code  of  Criminal  Procedure  in  a  matter  where  the
\ninvestigation is pending’, following the earlier decisions reported in (1) AIR
\n1945 PC  18  (EMPEROR  vs.    NAZIR AHMAD), (2) AIR 1963 SC 447 (STATE OF WEST
\nBENGAL vs.  S.N.BASAK)<\/a> (3)AIR 1963 SC 117 (  ABHINANDAN  JHA  AND  OTHERS  vs.
\nDINESH MISHRA), and<\/a> (4) 1980 (1) SCC 554 ( STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER vs.  JAC
\nSALDANHA AND OTHERS) has held:\n<\/p>\n
“…   the  legal  position  is  absolutely clear and also settled by judicial
\nauthorities that the Court would  not  interfere  with  the  investigation  or
\nduring  the  course  of  investigation  which  would mean from the time of the
\nlodging of the First Information Report till the submission of the  report  by
\nthe officer-in-charge of police station in Court under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.,
\nthis field being exclusively reserved for the Investigating Agency.”\n<\/p>\n
                25.   Since  in the case in hand also, it is reported that the
\ninvestigation is pending, the proposition held by the  Honourable  Apex  Court
\nwould squarely  become applicable to the case in hand.  Both the points framed
\nabove are answered against the petitioner  and  the  above  criminal  original
\npetition becomes liable only to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
                26.   For  all  the discussions held, the only conclusion that
\nthis Court could arrive  at  in  the  facts  and  circumstances  of  the  case
\nconnected  to  the  above  criminal  original petition is to dismiss the above
\ncriminal original petition as devoid of merits.\n<\/p>\n
                In result, the above criminal original petition is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
                Consequently, Crl.M.P.No.7926 of 2002 is also dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
Index:  Yes
\nInternet:  Yes
\nvjy\/Rao<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
1.The IX Metropolitan Magistrate,
\nSaidapet, Chennai-15.\n<\/p>\n
2.The Inspector of Police,
\nJ5 Shastri Nagar Police Station,
\nChennai.\n<\/p>\n
3.The Public Prosecutor,
\nHigh Court, Madras.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14\/10\/2003 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE V.KANAGARAJ CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.19498 OF 2002 AND CRL.M.P.No.7926 OF 2002. Raghunath V.Nair … Petitioner -Vs- State, by The Inspector of Police J5 Shastri Nagar Police Station, Chennai. … […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-146605","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nRaghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2003-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-17T17:13:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"18 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-17T17:13:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003\"},\"wordCount\":3541,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003\",\"name\":\"Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-17T17:13:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-17T17:13:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"18 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003","datePublished":"2003-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-17T17:13:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003"},"wordCount":3541,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003","name":"Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-17T17:13:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghunath-v-nair-vs-state-on-14-october-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Raghunath V.Nair vs State on 14 October, 2003"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/146605","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=146605"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/146605\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=146605"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=146605"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=146605"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}