CRL OP No. 17722 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL OP No. 17722 of 2026 and Crl MP No.11830 & 11831 of 2026 Selvakumar M S/o Murugavel, 19/27, Muthukumarasamy Layout, Venkatesa Colony, Pollachi, Coimbatore. Tamil Nadu-642 001. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State Rep By, The Sub-Inspector Of Police Pollachi East Police Station, Coimbatore. 2. Arumugasamy S/o Subramaniyam, 20/40, Kumaran Street, Pollachi, Coimbatore. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS Act, seeking to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings in CC.No.1017 of 2025 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court - I, Pollachi and quash the same. For Petitioner(s): M/s.P.J.Anitha For Respondent(s): Mr.Mohamed Riyaz Government Advocate (Crl.Side), for R1 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the final report in C.C. No. 1017 of 2025 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court - I, Pollachi. The complaint alleges that the petitioner made a social media post by https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17722 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 morphing the image of the then Chief Minister to look as if he were drinking a bottle of beer, accompanied by a message referencing the introduction of a new brand of alcohol. Consequently, the case was registered, and the final report was filed for alleged offences under Sections 153, 504, and 505(1)(b) of the IPC, and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the offences under Sections 153 and 504, among others, are not made out, even assuming the allegations are true. Furthermore, regarding the Information Technology Act, it is argued that there is absolutely no material or evidence produced along with the final report to indicate that it was the petitioner who uploaded the post to social media. 3. I have also heard the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side). I agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that the averments do not make out an offence under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code. However, concerning the Information Technology Act, although the learned counsel is correct that there is currently no material to definitively prove the petitioner morphed or posted the image on social media, the prosecution has submitted that the petitioner's mobile phone has already been seized and sent for expert forensic analysis. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17722 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 4. If the expert forensic analysis report indicates that the petitioner morphed and uploaded the image, and if traces of the same are found on the mobile phone, there may be sufficient material to proceed against the petitioner. Since this Court permitted the filing of the final report while awaiting the expert's final opinion, and the prosecution has done so, this is not the stage at which this Court can quash the entire case. 5. Therefore, reserving the liberty of the petitioner to approach this Court again after the receipt of the expert report, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of. 6. Considering the nature of the allegations and the hardship pleaded, the personal appearance of the petitioner before the trial Court is dispensed with, except for the necessary hearings insisted upon by the trial Court. Upon production of a copy of this order, the concerned expert shall expedite the report. 10-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No GBI https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17722 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. GBI To 1. The Sub-Inspector Of Police Pollachi East Police Station, Coimbatore. 2. Arumugasamy S/o Subramaniyam, 20/40, Kumaran Street, Pollachi, Coimbatore. 3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras. CRL OP No. 17722 of 2026 and Crl MP No.11830 & 11831 of 2026 10-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis