JUDGMENT (Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to the case in P.R.C.No.15 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District and quash the same.) 1. The Petitioners are A1 to A4, facing trial in P.R.C.No.15 of 2014, pending before the leaned Judicial Magistrate I, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District, for the offences under Sections 294(b), 506(i) of IPC r/w 3(1)(x) and 3(2)(vii) of SC/ST Act. 2. The contention of the Petitioners is that they are permanently residing in Veeramudaiyanatham village. First Petitioner is the Secretary of a political party in Veeramudaiyanatham Panchayath and a social activist. Second Petitioner is the son of the first Petitioner. Third Petitioner also belong to a political party and a social activist. Fourth Petitioner is the son of third Petitioner. Petitioners 1 & 3 are rendering social services to their village people in respect of implementation of public welfare schemes provided by the State. They are also working to ensure that the Panchayath and Government authorities, promptly implement the schemes, without delay and deviation, if any mistake or defect found, they make representation to higher authorities, ensure that all the schemes are properly implemented. They regularly collect information through RTI, remind the officials and Panchayath President for their slackness in implementation of the welfare schemes for the villagers. 3. It is further submitted that the Defacto Complainant/2nd Respondent was elected as President of Veeramudaiyanatham Panchayat for the first time, during the period 2006-2011, she seldom cared for the welfare of the village people, she functioned on her own, misappropriating the funds of the village Panchayath. She misappropriated nearly Rs.4,07,860/-. The 1st Petitioner made a complaint to the District Collector, Cuddalore and to various authorities, who took steps and conducted enquiry. In fact, on the complaint of the 1st Petitioner, the Assistant Director of Panchayath, Cuddalore District conducted an enquiry, submitted a report on 23.03.2011 and an order was passed, directing the Defacto Complainant to compensate the Panchayath to the tune of Rs.2,97,710/-. She failed to make payment and again contested for the second time for the period from 2011-2016. The Petitioners made objections stating that already she had been directed to pay sum of Rs.2,97,710/-, which she failed to pay. Later she was allowed to contest and got elected and continued her misappropriation of Panchayath funds. She failed to make payment and again contested for the second time for the period from 2011-2016. The Petitioners made objections stating that already she had been directed to pay sum of Rs.2,97,710/-, which she failed to pay. Later she was allowed to contest and got elected and continued her misappropriation of Panchayath funds. Hence there was motives and the Petitioners falsely implicated in this case. 4. It is further submitted that the other motive is that the Defacto Complainant's husband viz., Thirugnanam was a Village Assistant, he got employment using forged educational certificate, which was found by the Petitioners, made complaints, action taken on the complaint of the Petitioners. On enquiry the Defacto Complainant's husband was suspended by order dated 25.11.2013. Hence Defacto Complainant had grudge and motive against the Petitioners, to spit venom, they were implicated in the above case. 5. It is further submitted that based on these motives, false complaint lodged against the Petitioners, as though Petitioners have threatened, abused her and her husband using filthy language. There is no reason to use abusive objectionable language, that too in a public, calling by caste name. The Petitioners sent representations to the Chief Minister and other authorities against the misdeeds of the Defacto Complainant. 6. It is further submitted that the 3rd Petitioner is no more and the learned counsel for the Petitioners produced a copy of death certificate of the 3rd Petitioner, bearing Registration No.D-2020:33-2273-000003. 7. Mr.L.Baskaran, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the 1st Respondent submitted that in this case, the 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant hails from Schedule Caste community, who contested in the village Panchayath election and successfully got elected for two terms for the period 2006-2011 and 2011-2016. The Petitioners belong to a leading political party, there was some misunderstanding between them. Defacto Complainant assuming position in the society, gaining financial status, became an eyesore to the Petitioners, due to this reason Defacto Complainant was abused, threatened in public, calling her by her caste name. Hence, she had lodged complaint. The Defacto Complainant facing charges under the Panchayath Act, will not give license for the Petitioners to abuse and threaten the Defacto Complainant calling her caste name. 8. It is further submitted that on the complaint of the Defacto Complainant, investigation conducted. LW1 to LW5 are the eyewitness to the occurrence, in whose presence, the occurrence took place. The Defacto Complainant facing charges under the Panchayath Act, will not give license for the Petitioners to abuse and threaten the Defacto Complainant calling her caste name. 8. It is further submitted that on the complaint of the Defacto Complainant, investigation conducted. LW1 to LW5 are the eyewitness to the occurrence, in whose presence, the occurrence took place. LW6 & LW7 are the person, who have come after hearing the commotion. Totally 12 witnesses in this case, all the witnesses confirmed the role played by the Petitioners. The points raised by the Petitioners are factual in nature, which can be considered during in the trial and not in this quash Petition. Further the case was registered under the SC/ST Act, in the year 2014 and final report filed in the year 2015, thereafter it is kept pending without progress. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the present Petition. It is further submitted that due to the pendency of the above case, the trial has been put to cold storage, as per the SC/ST act, time frame is prescribed for completion of investigation and trial, hence sought appropriate directions. 9. Learned counsel for the Petitioner without prejudice submitted that the Petitioners are ready to cooperate with the trial and they will not be a reason for any delay. He further submitted that the case posted before the committal Court on 27.09.2022. At that time, A1, A2 & A4 will appear before the court below. He further submitted that A1 is a senior citizen, aged more than 70 years, suffering from Parkinson, leukemia and other age related health issues. Hence A1's presence may not be insisted and his absence to be considered sympathetically. A1 will be represented by his counsel. 10. The learned counsel for the Petitioner undertakes that Petitioners will appear before the committal Court and trial Court, whenever their presence is absolutely necessary. 11. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the points raised are factual, though it might appear to be reasonable, the same has to be considered during trial and not in the quash Petition. In view of the same, I am not inclined to entertain this Petition. 12. Accordingly, this Petition is dismissed with a direction. Petitioners 1, 2 & 4 are directed to appear before the committal Court on 27.09.2022, without fail. In view of the same, I am not inclined to entertain this Petition. 12. Accordingly, this Petition is dismissed with a direction. Petitioners 1, 2 & 4 are directed to appear before the committal Court on 27.09.2022, without fail. On the Petitioner's appearance, the case to be committed to the Special Court for SC/ST Act, on or before 11.10.2022. The Special Judge, Special Court for SC/ST Act, concerned, shall conclude the trial preferably within a period of four months. In the event of Petitioners filing any Petition to dispense with personal appearance, the same can be considered, sympathetically. The Petitioners to appear before the trial Court, without fail, on the date when the trial Court directs to do so. If any dilatory tactics is adopted, the trial Court shall take coercive action, if necessary, taking the Petitioners into confinement. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.