Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1383 (MAD)

Vinith v. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Petchiparai Police Station, Kanniyakumari District

2016-03-31

P.N.PRAKASH

body2016
ORDER : This petition has been filed, seeking to call for the records connected with the case in Crime No.109 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police in so far as the petitioners are concerned and quash the same as illegal. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State. 3. It is seen that on the complaint lodged by the District Educational Officer, the respondent police have registered a case in Crime No.109 of 2015 on 23.11.2015 under Section 380 IPC. It is the case of the defacto complainant that laptops that were intended for distribution to poor school students were kept stored in the school godown and on opening the godown on 19.10.2015, it was found that 20 laptops and 5 bags were found missing. During the course of investigation, the respondent police arrested one Vinodkumar (A1) and Saravanan (A2) and these petitioners (A5 & A6 respectively) and some laptops were also recovered. At this juncture, the accused persons have come forward with this petition for quashing the FIR, on the ground that their names do not figure in the FIR. 4. In a case of this nature, the absence of the name in the FIR cannot be a reason to quash the same. The Supreme Court in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and others, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 has laid down certain parameters for quashing an FIR. The present case does not pass muster the law laid down by the Supreme Court (supra). 5. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed accordingly. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.