VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2025 › High Court of Madras

Vijayalakshmi v. The State Rep.By, the Inspector of Police,

DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
11 June 2025
Bench
P. Velmuruganauthor
Case no.
CRL OP 10080/2025

Follow Madras High CourtFollow P. Velmurugan

Judgment

O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records in connection with the charge sheet in C.C.No.88 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate-1 Court at Panruti and to quash the same as far as the petitioner/Accused No.6 is concerned.

¶2Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent-Police and perused the materials available on record.

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been arrayed as 6th accused in C.C.No.88 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Panruti. She is working as a Nurse in the Primary Health Centre. She is not involved in the alleged offence and she has been falsely implicated in this case and she was also not informed either about the complaint or the charge sheet that she has been arrayed as an accused. She has been unnecessarily dragging from pillar to post. Hence, the petitioner prayed for quashing of the charge sheet in C.C.No.88 of 2016.

¶4Learned Government Advocate, (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent-Police submitted that the respondent Police registered the case and investigated the matter and laid a charge sheet. Witnesses have spoken about the involvement of the petitioner in the offences and also there is a specific overt act as against the petitioner. The grounds taken by the petitioner are nothing but defences, which can be agitated only during the course of trial. Hence, the criminal original petition may be dismissed.

¶5Admittedly, the respondent-Police registered a case in Crime No.684 of 2024 on 13.09.2014, in which, the petitioner has been shown as sixth accused. Subsequently, investigation has been completed by the investigating agency and charge sheet has also been laid. On a reading of charge sheet, statement of the witnesses recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation, and also the medical records, this Court finds that there are prima facie materials available to proceed the case further as against the petitioner also.

¶6The grounds taken by the petitioner in the petition are nothing but defences and the same can be agitated only during the course of trial. There is no merit in the criminal original petition. Hence, the criminal original petition is dismissed. Since the CC is pending more than nine years, the learned Magistrate is directed to conduct trial on day-to-day-basis in C.C.No.88 of 2016 and disposed of the same on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶7The petitioner is directed to extend her fullest cooperation for early disposal of the case. The personal appearance of the petitioner before the trial Court is dispensed with. However, she has to appear before the trial Court as and when her presence is required. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition in Crl.M.P.No.6715 of 2025 is also dismissed.

11.06.2025 mfa Index:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No To

¶1The Judicial Magistrate-1 Court at Panruti

¶2The Inspector of Police, Panruti P.S., Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District.

¶3The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai. Crl.O.P.No.10080oooofo2025 P.VELMURUGAN,oJ mfa Crl.O.P.No.10080oooofoo2025 and Crl.M.P.Nos.6715o&o6719ooofooo2025

11.06.2025 Pageo6oofo6

Case details

Parties and counsel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 11.06.2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Crl.O.P.No.10080 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.Nos.6715 & 6719 of 2025 Vijayalakshmi ... Petitioner Vs 1. The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Panruti P.S., Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District. 2. Selvi ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS 2023, seeking to call for the records in connection with the charge sheet in C.C.No.88 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate-1 Court at Panruti and to quash the same as far as the petitioner/Accused No.6 is concerned. For Petitioner : Mr.AR.Prabudevan For R1 : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Not ready in notice

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.