Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 78235 (MAD)

Venkatesan v. The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police

CRL OP/34740/2025 · 2026-01-02

A D Jagadish Chandira

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Crl.O.P.No.34740 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02.01.2026 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.34740 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.24356 of 2025 1. Venkatesan 2. Thiruvengadam 3. Rajathi 4. Monisha 5. Sathish 6. Ramalingam 7. Manimaran 8. Rajkumar 9. Sarguna Sargunam 10. Boomidevan 11. Selvi 12. Devandran 13. Suresh 14. Arulmurugan 15. Mohana 16. Uma 17. Murugan @ Marugan ... Petitioners Vs. 1. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Mamallapuram Police Station, Chengalpet District. 2. Palani ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS to direct the respondent Police to call for the entire records in connection with the impugned FIR in Crime No.521 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.34740 of 2025 For Petitioners : Mr.M.Vijayaragavan For Respondents : Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Criminal Side) – R1 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the entire records in connection with the impugned FIR in Crime No.521 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant and the petitioners belong to the same village. The 3rd petitioner viz. Rajathi, who is the Vice President of the village, was removed from the said post due to misappropriation committed by her in Panchayat funds and some of the villagers celebrated the same by bursting crackers. Hence, the petitioners herein assembled and trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and damaged the household articles like T.V., dining table, sofa and chairs and also attempted to fire the gas cylinder. 3.Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are the victims. The fact remains that the de facto complainant and his party assaulted the petitioners. Based on the complaint given by the petitioners, a case in Crime No.519 of 2024 was registered against the 2nd respondent and his associates. As a counter blast, a false complaint has https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.34740 of 2025 been given by the 2nd respondent, based on which, the respondent police have registered a case in Crime No.521 of 2024. He would further submit that the petitioners are the victims and hence he would seek quashment of the impugned proceedings. 4.Per contra, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioners and the de facto complainant belong to the same fishermen village and there was a group clash, due to which, a case and counter case have been registered and he would submit that investigation is being done in this case. He would submit that the persons belonging to the rival party have also been assaulted. He would submit that the accused in the counter case have filed Crl.O.P.No.34880 of 2025 and this Court vide order dated 02.01.2026, has directed the respondent police to complete the enquiry and file a final report within a period of three months. He would submit that in respect of the very same incident, yet another F.I.R. is pending in Crime No.520 of 2024 and a direction has also been issued by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.34909 of 2025 vide order dated 19.12.2025 to complete the investigation. He would submit that following PSO 556, the respondent police are taking steps to complete the investigation in all the above three cases and file the final report at the earliest. 5.Heard both sides. Perused the materials placed on record. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.34740 of 2025 6.This is a case of case and counter. This Court, in Crl.O.P.No.34880 of 2025, has directed the respondent police to complete the investigation in the counter cases. In such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings. However, the respondent police is directed to complete the investigation in Crime No.521 of 2024 and other crime numbers, following PSO 566 and file the final report in both cases. 7.The above Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of accordingly. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 02.01.2026 kas Neutral Citation: Yes/No Index : Yes / No To 1. The Inspector of Police, Mamallapuram Police Station Chengalpet District. 2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104. A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.34740 of 2025 kas Crl.O.P.No.34740 of 2025 02.01.2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis