ONDIMUTHU Vs. STATE REP BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The factual matrix of the case is as under:

(2.) Heard Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.Mayil Vahana Rajendran, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

(3.) Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there are no materials to frame charge for the offence under Section 468 of the Indian Penal Code as against Ondimuthu (A-3), because Ondimuthu (A-3) had not signed as a witness in document No.446 of 2009, but, whereas, he had stood as witness only in respect of Document No.2870 of 2007, which was sold to Faritha Begum (L.W.4).