B SANKARAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners approach this Court with a prayer to quash the proceedings made in S.T.C. No.' 192 of 2008, pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Shencottah.

(2.) The petitioner in Crl. O.P. (MD). No. 5040 of 2008, who is a villager and the petitioner in Crl. O.P. (MD). No. 4297 of 2008, who is a Village Administrative Officer. The facts and the question of law, which arises in both the petitions are one and the same. Hence, these petitions can be disposed of by a common order.

(3.) The case of the prosecution is that they registered a case on 4.5.2007 in Crime No. 205 of 2007, for an offence under Section 302 I.P.C. related to the occurrence, which took place on 10.12.1991. One Sangaralingam, while taking bath near a well, had slipped and subsequently died due to drowning into the said well. But whereas, the respondent police, on the basis of complaint given by one Kandasamy, registered a case after a lapse of 16 years, for an offence under Section 302 I.P.C, completed the investigation and filed a charge-sheet against the petitioners and Others under Section 176 read with 203 I.P.C. As far as Section 176 I.P.C. is concerned, a person who is legally bound to give information is liable to be punished.