MURUGESAN Vs. STATE TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are respectively 2nd and 3rd accused in CC. No. 301 of 1980, pending before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Poonamallee against whom another, charges have been framed for offences under Sections 120-B, 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code invoke the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the above proceedings.

(2.) Facts briefly are The respondent filed charge-sheet against one Mohammed Usman Sheriff arrayed as A-1 and the petitioners arrayed as A-2 and A-3 respectively, for the above offences on the allegation, that 1st accused being an employee in the Air Port, R.M.S. (sic) Office at Meenambakkam, the first petitioner as Postman attached to the Post Office at Saint Thomas Mount and the Second petitioner as clerk in the above Post Office and others, entered into a criminal conspiracy, to each British postal order intended for others, by forging the signatures and encashing them and that in pursuance of the conspiracy 1st accused on 30-1-83 opened a Savings Bank account in the name of S. W. Samuel and deposited three British postal orders in the above account and later withdrew the amounts under the postal orders, in all amounting to Rs. 462/- and also that 1st accused on 23-6-78 opened a Savings Bank: account in the Post Office at St. Thomas Mount in the name of one Solaiappan and deposited four British postal orders in all valued at Rs. 600/- and later withdrew the above amount and this was done with the assistance of the petitioners. It is also alleged that 1st accused paid back the total sum of Rs. 1,062/- to the postal department and made good the loss. On the above allegation charges have been framed against 1st accused and the petitioners. for offences under Sections 120-B, 420 and 468 of Indian Penal Code. The petitioners seek quashing of the above charges.

(3.) Thiru Rajkumar Roberts, Learned Counsel for the petitioners urged the following, contentions: (i) There is absolutely no material against the present petitioners, for framing charges for the above offences (ii) The petitioners have been supplied with only copy of FIR. charge-sheet and the certificate of the handwriting expert. No other document has been supplied to them under Section 207 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Without copies of any statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 of Criminal Procedure Code and without copies of any documents it is not possible for the petitioners to understand what the case against them is.