K.THULASI Vs. STATE REP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The second respondent herein is the defacto complainant. The respondent Police is common in both the cases. Since the issue involved and the prayer sought for are being common, these petitions are taken up together for a common disposal.

(2.) The facts of the case in Crl.O.P.No.490 of 2012 is that on 01.03.2020, the second respondent one Sethuraman, an advocate practising in Egmore Courts had lodged a complaint with the respondent Police that when one Karunakaran in connection with a criminal case has been produced for remand and during that time the supporters of Karunakaran viz., the petitioners herein were present there and abused and threatened the photographers and others. When the same was questioned by the second respondent/defacto complainant, the petitioners abused him in filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the case in Crime No.311 of 2011 came to be registered against the petitioners for the offences under Section 341 , 294(b) and 506(ii) IPC. After completing investigation, the respondent Police listed six witnesses L.W.1 to L.W.6 and documents and filed the charge sheet.

(3.) The facts of the case in Crl.O.P.No.491 of 2012 is that the petitioner was working in Southern Railways, as Technician of Diesel Loco Motive Section and he was a Boxer and also giving boxing coaching. He is also a Joint Secretary in Tamil Nadu Amaetur Boxing Association and one Karunakaran is the President of the said Association. There has been some bitterness between the petitioner and one Devan, who is the Coach of Souther Railways Boxing team and his friend V.Devanand of P.A.V. Naidu Boxing Club, with regards to procuring of jobs in Railways in Sports quota. On 01.03.2011, the said Karunakaran was arrested and was brought to Court to produce before the Magistrate for remand. During that time, the 1st petitioner viz.,Thulasi, was present there. At that time, the said Devanand along with four others had restrained and surrounded the petitioner and assaulted him. In that process, the petitioner lost two tooth from the upper jaw and thereafter he was taken to the hospital and admitted. Thereafter, a complaint was lodged against the accused persons and the same was registered in Crime No.305 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 341 , 323 , 325 r/w 34 of IPC . After investigation, the respondent Police filed a charge sheet in C.C.No.4642 of 2011 before the learned IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, after listing 12 witnesses L.W.1 to L.W.12 and documents and now the case is pending for trial.