LAWS(MAD)-1986-11-35

R. PASUPATHY Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

Decided On November 24, 1986
R. PASUPATHY Appellant
V/S
INSPECTOR OF POLICE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition coming on for hearing upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and the counter affidavit filed therein and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. S. Mahimai Raj, Advocate for the petitioner and of Mr. A. N. Rajan, Government Advocate (Criminal side) on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 and of Mr. R. Thamodaran, Advocate for the fourth respondent, the Court made the following order:

(2.) THE ninth accused in P.R.C. No. 1 of 1986 on the file of the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Nanguneri, has filed this petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the said proceedings against him.

(3.) THE deceased Ramaswami was found missing from 8 -10 -1985. Chidambarantha Nadar gave a complaint on 19 -10 -1985 at 300 P.M. alleging that Ramaswami Nadar was missing. He was suspected to have been murdered and buried in his thottam - A case was registered in crime No 145 of 1985 of Ovari Police Station under the head suspicious death against the son of the deceased, namely, Swambu Anandan. The Inspector of Police, Thisayanvilai, who is the first respondent herein, investigated the case under the direct supervision of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Valliyur, the second respondent. In respect of the death of her father, the wife of the petitioner also gave a complaint to the first respondent. Inspector, alleging that there is suspicion on the death of her father and that Chidambaranathan, Ganesan and Sulochana might have murdered her father and looted the properties of the deceased. Being aggrieved by the same, respondents 1 and 2 made Ganesan to give a statement on 13 -10 -1985 to the effect that the petitioner herein along with his brother -in law conspired together to murder Ramaswami Nadar on 5 -10 -1985 in his police quarters at Tuticorin. A charge -sheet was laid in this case on 30 -12 -1985 arraying the petitioner, as the ninth accused. According to the petitioner respondents have no jurisdiction to continue the investigation, in view of the Po1ice Standing Order 145 (Volume I) and the present investigation done by respondents 1 and 2 resulting in filing charge -sheet dated 30 -12 -1985 is illegal and liable to be quashed. It is further stated that as per Police Standing Order 145 (4), the Revenue Divisional Officer is competent to Jay information before any judicial First Class Magistrate against the Police Officer in causing the death. It is further alleged that for prosecuting the petitioner, sanction of the Head of the Department is necessary as per section 107 Cr. P.C. Since no sanction was obtained, the charge -sheet against the petitioner is liable to be quashed. According to the petitioner, from 0845 hours on