S NALLASAMY Vs. RAMALINGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the order dated 27.02.2015 made in C.M.P.No.4062 of 2014 in C.C.No.123 of 2011, on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kodumudi.

(2.) The revision petitioner is the defacto complainant in Crime No.100 of 2011. After conducting investigation, the Police have filed charge sheet before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kodumudi and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.123 of 2011. Charges were framed against the respondents 1 to 11. During the pendency of the trial, the petitioner/defacto complainant has filed C.M.P.No.4062 of 2014 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kodumudi, to implead 20 more persons in the said case. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kodumudi, has dismissed C.M.P.No.4062 of 2014 on the ground that the proposed respondents names have not been mentioned either in the FIR or in the statement recorded by the Police under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the revision petitioner/defacto complainant is before this Court with this Criminal Revision Case to set aside the order passed by the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kodumudi, in C.M.P.No.4062 of 2014 dated 27.02015.

(3.) During trial, the defacto complainant who is examined as P.W.1 clearly deposed about the offences committed by the 20 persons/proposed respondents. P.W.1, in his deposition has stated that these 20 persons/proposed respondents have also came along with 11 persons/the accused respondents herein. P.Ws.2, 3 and 4 also corroborated the same. Therefore, solely based on the evidence of P.Ws.1, 2, 3 & 4, P.W.1/the defacto complainant has filed C.M.P.No.4062 of 2014 to implead those 20 persons also in C.C.No.123 of 2011 as accused/proposed respondents. Whereas, the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kodumudi, has failed to consider the depositions of P.Ws.1,2,3 & 4 and has dismissed the petition, which warrants interference of this Court.