A.Ragupathy v. State of Tamilnadu Rep. by Sub Inspector of Police

ORDER This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the F.I.R No.01/2019 on the file of respondent police and all the proceedings arising therefrom. Page2 of 6

¶2It is the case of the prosecution that on 02.10.2019, the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Q-Branch CID, Coimbatore City, lodged a complaint stating that he had received reliable intelligence through confidential sources that the petitioner (A10), Ragupathy, was operating an office under the name and style of "Vishal Impex" at Coimbatore. The petitioner was allegedly engaged in real estate business and was also arranging visas for persons intending to travel abroad.

¶3It is further alleged that the petitioner, in collusion with one Anandhakumar (A3), a resident of the Sri Lankan Tamil Rehabilitation Camp at Kangeyam, Tiruppur District, was fraudulently fabricating and misusing Government-issued Indian identity documents such as Voter ID Cards, Aadhaar Cards and PAN Cards for Sri Lankan Tamil refugees who were not entitled to obtain Indian passports.

¶4During the search conducted at the petitioner's residence, 36 incriminating documents and articles relating to Sri Lankan Tamil nationals were seized in the presence of two independent witnesses. The seized materials included forged and fraudulently obtained Indian passports, PAN Cards, Aadhaar Cards, bank passbooks, educational certificates, school and college transfer certificates, and other related documents. Further investigation revealed Page3 of 6 that the petitioner had allegedly been indulging in such activities from the year 2017 onwards. Hence, a case in Crime No.1 of 2019 has been registered for an offences under Sections 120 B, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC and Sections 12

(1A), 12 (1A) (a) and 12 (1A) (b) of the Passport Act, 1967.

¶5The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on going through the FIR, it can be seen that the FIR is very short and crisp. There is nothing on evidence to show that the petitioner had cheated any one or prepared any forged document to be used as an enclosure for passport and to obtain Visa. The FIR has been lodged only on surmises and conjunctions. He further submit that the petitioner is not a Srilankan refugee. Thus, the allegations in the complaint has to be taken as a whole that no offence has been made out. The present FIR is totally absurd and no final report can be filed on the basis of the information collected so far. Hence, he prayed to quash the FIR.

¶6The learned counsel for the Government of Tamilnadu (Criminal Side) filed a counter and submitted that in this case investigation established that several Sri Lankan Tamil refugees including A1, A11 to A16 had obtained Indian passports with the active collusion of accused persons. The petitioner acted as the key visa facilitator for these individuals, arranging their travel to foreign countries. The arrested accused persons have confessed the role played by the petitioner. During the search at the petitioner's house, several documents Page4 of 6 have been collected. He would submit that the forgery committed by the petitioner had been confirmed and the Indian passports have been tampered with. In this case, so far 327 witnesses have been examined and 259 documents have been collected and it is not a speculative FIR. On the search conducted at the petitioner's house, totally 37 incriminating items were seized during the arrest of the petitioner. It can be seen that the petitioner had been involved in a similar case of this nature and he has got a criminal record. In view of the above, the learned counsel strongly opposed to quash the FIR and sought three months time to file the final report before the jurisdictional Court.

¶7This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record. The FIR discloses specific allegations against the petitioner. The materials placed before this Court reveal that during the course of investigation, several incriminating documents were recovered from the petitioner and statements have been recorded from various witnesses. The prosecution has also stated that as many as 327 witnesses have been examined and 259 documents have been collected during the investigation. The allegations involve fabrication of identity documents and misuse of passports in relation to Sri Lankan Tamil refugees, which require a thorough investigation. Page5 of 6

¶8At the stage of investigation, this Court cannot embark upon an enquiry into the correctness or otherwise of the allegations. The contentions raised by the petitioner pertain to disputed questions of fact, which can be examined only upon completion of investigation and not in a petition seeking quashment of the FIR. The allegations in the complaint, if taken at their face value, prima facie disclose the commission of cognizable offences and therefore warrant a full-fledged investigation. This Court does not find the FIR to be absurd, inherently improbable or a speculative one so as to warrant interference under Section 528 BNSS.

¶9In view of the above, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. The respondent Police is directed to complete the investigation and file the final report before the jurisdictional Court, as expeditiously as possible. 23-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order JER To

¶1The Sub Inspector of Police Q-Branch CID, Coimbatore City.

¶2The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o7059oofo2026 M.NIRMALoKUMAR,oJ. JER CRLoOPoNo.o7059oofo2026 23-06-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR A.Ragupathy S/o.Arumugam, 3rd Street, Ganapathy Pudur, Coimbatore 641 006. ..Petitioner(s) Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep. by Sub Inspector of Police Q- Branch CID, Coimbatore City. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to quash the F.I.R No.01/2019 on the file of respondent police and all proceedings arising therefrom, in the interests of justice, equity, and to prevent abuse of the process of law. For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Merin Shalom For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran Counsel for Government of Tamilnadu (Criminal Side)