Madras High Court
Anbalagan vs The State Rep. By on 2 March, 2026
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.03.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022 and
Crl.MP.No.17875 of 2022
Anbalagan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.THE State Rep. By
INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
Pennagaram Police Station,
Dharmapuri District 636 810
(crime No.503 of 2021)
2.PERIYASAMY ... Respondents
Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
praying to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings in PRC No.15
of 2022 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Pennagaram, on the file of
the Respondent Police and to quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Bharathi Raja
for M/s.Nathan and Associates
For Respondents
For R1 : Mr.A.Gopinath,
Government Advocate(crl.side)
Page 1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 11:57:10 am )
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022
ORDER
This criminal original petition has been filed praying to
quash the proceedings in PRC No.15 of 2022 on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate, Pennagaram
2. The case of the prosecution is that Al is a road contractor and
doing quarry business in the name of Arun Blue Metal and Jayam
Agencies. The accused A1 is the owner of the above said company and he
came to know about that for the past 1 ½ years, said company workers
had stolen the company’s fuel (diesel) from the crusher machine and sold
the same to the local Tractor and JCB owners. Due to that, the accused Al
got raged on the sellers, who sold the company’s fuel (diesel) and got
angry on the witnesses Muthuvel and Suresh, those who purchased the
diesel illegally from the above said quarry without knowledge of the
accused A1. So that, the accused A1 to A7 joined together and discussed
about the unlawfully purchased diesel from the above said quarry and
then, they decided to kidnap the witnesses Muthuvel and Suresh for
ransom with intention to collect the diesel amount from them. On
17.11.2021 at about 10.00 AM, when the accused A1 to A6 joined
together at the above said quarry office and A1 to A7 have hatched into a
criminal conspiracy to kidnap the witnesses Suresh and Muthuvel for
Page 2 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 11:57:10 am )
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022
ransom with intention of committing of extortion from the witnesses
Muthuvel and Suresh and in pursuance of the above said criminal
conspiracy held between them for committing extortion of money from
the witnesses Muthuvel and Suresh and thereby, the accused A1 to A7
had committed the offence punishable under section 120(B) IPC each. In
the course of the same transaction, on 17.11.2021 at about 10.00 AM, in
front of the witness Periyasamy’s house located at Jelmarampatti Village,
within the jurisdiction of Pennagaram P.S limits, when the accused A1 to
A6 assembled and joined together in pursuance of criminal conspiracy to
kidnap the witnesses Muthuvel and Suresh for ransom with intention of
committing extortion from the witnesses Muthuvel and Suresh and were
proceeding in a TATA Scorpio car bearing Registration number TN 65 AY
7080 from Thallapallam to witness Periyasamy’s house and then, in front
of above said place, the accused A1 to A6 were member of the unlawful
assembly and were armed with deadly weapons namely wooden log, iron
pipe for kidnapping for ransom and likely to cause death to the witnesses
Muthuvel and Suresh and thereby the accused A1 to A6 had committed
the offence punishable under section 147, 148 IPC each. In the course of
the same transaction, at the same place and time, when the accused Al
instigated the accused A2 to A6 and abused the witnesses Muthuvel with
filthy words and then, the accused A1 voluntarily assaulted the witness
Page 3 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 11:57:10 am )
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022
Muthuvel with wooden log on the head, shoulders, neck and back side of
the body repeatedly. Simultaneously, the accused A2, A3 joined together
and assaulted the witness Muthuvel with iron pipe on the back side of the
body, hands repeatedly and then, the accused A4, A6 joined together and
assaulted the witness Muthuvel on hands and thereby sustained injuries.
Simultaneously, the accused Al instigated the accused A2 to A6 and
voluntarily assaulted the witness Suresh with wooden log on the back
side of the body and thereby sustained injuries and wrongfully restrained
the witness Suresh, Muthvel from proceeding further into any direction
and with intention of kidnapping the witness Suresh and Muthuvel for
ransom and they also put them inside the above said car and kidnapped
the witnesses Muthuvel and Suresh to the Arun Blue Metal company
which is located at Pethampatti Village, where A7 joined together with
common object along with the accused A1 to A6 and voluntarily
assaulted the witnesses Muthuvel and Suresh, thereby A1 committed
offence punishable under section 294(b) IPC (2 counts), and the accused
A1 to A6 had committed the offence punishable under section 341 IPC
each, while all the accused A1 to A7 had committed the offence
punishable under sections 364-A, 365, 323, 324, 342, 330, 348, 346, 387
IPC each. In the course of the same transaction, at the same place and
time, when the accused A1 went to Arun Blue Metal company, which is
Page 4 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 11:57:10 am )
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022
located at Pethampatti Village and in front of the above said company
gate, the accused got down from the above said Car and had committed
the criminal Intimidation by threatening the witnesses and thereby, the
accused Al had committed the offence punishable under section 506(i)
IPC.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
submit that the first respondent without even following the principles laid
down in the case of D.K.Basu Vs. State of West Bengal, conducted
investigation and filed final report. There is absolutely no prima facie
case made out against the petitioner to attract any of the charges under
Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 341, 342, 364A, 365, 330, 348, 346,
4. On perusal of the records, it is revealed that there are
specific allegations against the accused persons in order to attract the
charges under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 341, 342, 364A, 365,
330, 348, 346, 387, 506(i) & 120B of IPC.
5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the judgment
reported in 2019 (4) SCC 351 in the case of Devendra Prasad Singh Vs.
Page 5 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 11:57:10 am )
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022
State of Bihar & Anr., (Crl.A.No.579 of 2019 dated 02.04.2019) while
dealing with the petition to quash the entire criminal proceedings held
that the High Courts have no jurisdiction to appreciate the statement of
the witnesses and record a finding that there were inconsistencies in their
statements and therefore, there was no prima facie case made out as
against the accused. It could be done only by the trial Court while
deciding the issues on the merits or/and by the Appellate Court while
deciding the appeal arising out of the final order that the charge sheet has
been laid on the basis of the inconsistent statement under Section 161 of
Cr.P.C.
6. Fruther, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the judgment
reported in 2019 (10) SCC 686 in the case of Central Bureau of
Investigation Vs. Arvind Khanna, (Crl.A.No.1572 of 2019 dated
17.10.2019) held that the High Courts cannot record the findings on the
disputed facts. The defence of the accused is to be tested after
appreciation of evidence by the trial Court during the trial. Therfore, this
Court has no power to consider the disputed facts under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C.
7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in another judgment
Page 6 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 11:57:10 am )
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022
dated 02.12.2019 passed in Crl.A.No.1817 of 2019 in the case of
M.Jayanthi Vs. K.R.Meenakshi & anr, held that while considering the
petition for quashment of complaint or charge sheet, the Court should not
embark upon an enquiry into the validity of the evidence available. All
that the Court should see is as to whether there are allegations in the
complaint which form the basis for the ingredients that consititue certain
offences complained of. Further, the Court can also see whether the
preconditions requisite for taking cognizance have been complied with or
not and whether the allegations contained in the complaint, even if
accepted in entirety, would not consititue the offence alleged. Whether
the accused will be able to prove the allegations in a manner known to
law would arise only at a later stage i.e., during trial.
8. Further this Court cannot observe at this stage that the
initiation of criminal proceeding itself is malicious. Whether the criminal
proceeding is malicious or not, is not required to be considered at this
state. The same is required to be considered at the conclusion of the trial.
Therefore, the ground raised by the petitioner to quash the final
report/charge sheet cannot be entertained to quash the entire proceedings.
9. Further, the present case has been committed to Principal
Page 7 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 11:57:10 am )
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022
District and Sessions Court, Dharmapuri and the same has been taken
cognizance in SC.No.135 of 2022. It is unfortunate to state that this
criminal original petition is pending without any interim order. Even then,
the trial court did not proceed with the trial. Therefore, the trial court is
directed to complete the trial within a period of six months from the date
of receipt of this order.
10. With the above direction, this criminal original petition is
dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
02.03.2026
Index : Yes/No
Neutral citation : Yes/No
Speaking/non-speaking order
lok
Page 8 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 11:57:10 am )
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022
To
1.Judicial Magistrate, Pennagaram
2.THE State Rep. By
INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
Pennagaram Police Station,
Dharmapuri District 636 810
Page 9 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 11:57:10 am )
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
lok
Crl.O.P.No.29223 of 2022
02.03.2026
Page 10 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/03/2026 11:57:10 am )