M SELVAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are accused 7, 4 and 5 in case pending in P.R.C.No.49 of 2003 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tambaram seek quash of proceedings as against them.

(2.) Crime No.378 of 2003 was registered for offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 302 r/w.149 and 120(B) IPC in relation to a murder of one Muthu alias Muthuramalingam on 19.05.2003 at about 8.15 a.m. Several persons were arrested in connection with such offence. After being released on bail and on compliance of the conditions thereof, the 2nd accused in this case viz., K.Jayaraman moved this Court for transfer of investigation in the case to C.B.C.I.D. This Court issued a direction that the investigation in the case shall be monitored by the Superintendent of Police, Chengalpet. Though, a charge sheet under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C was filed against the petitioners herein and others, the Superintendent of Police found that further investigation was necessary and on such investigation, a special team entrusted to the investigation have detected the involvement of six persons other than the accused earlier arrayed in the case. On an affidavit filed by the Inspector of Police on 05.12.2003, the accused, other than the petitioners herein, who were named in the original charge sheet were deleted and a final report under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. was filed on 05.01.2004 whereunder six persons whose involvement was found out as also these petitioners stand implicated. The investigating officer filed an affidavit on 09.01.2004 before the lower court stating that during the course of further investigation, it was found that six persons were the real accused behind the murder.

(3.) It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that though in the affidavits of the investigating officer filed before the lower court on 26.09.2003, 05.12.2003 and 09.01.2004, nothing had been stated about the involvement of these petitioners as accused and despite the investigating officer's assertion that it was the six persons whose involvement was discovered through further investigation that were the real accused, still these petitioners have been arrayed as accused 7, 4 and 5 in the case.