On the complaint lodged by Manonmani, the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.164 of 2015 on 15.07.2015 and after completing the investigation, has filed a charge sheet in C.C.No.98 of 2016 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vilathikulam against nine accused, challenging which, A-5 and A-8 are before this Court.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that there are disputes between the family of the defacto complainant and the family of the accused with regard to the management of the affairs of the local temple and that on 15.07.2015 during the temple festival, when the defacto complainant and her family members were keeping pongal, it is alleged that the accused numbering nine, who belong to the rival family, formed into an unlawful assembly and assaulted the defacto complainant and her son. They also poured water over the pots in which the defacto complainant's family had kept pongal and deranged them. Hence, the First Information Report and charge sheet.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that on account of the previous motive, a false case has bee foisted against the petitioners. He also contended that the charge sheet merely says
Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code and does not say whether it is 294(a) or 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code.
4. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor refuted the allegations.
5. This Court gave its anxious consideration to the rival submissions.
6. On a thorough reading of the charge sheet and the First Information Report given by the defacto complainant, it is seen that she has clearly attributed the role played by each of the accused including that of the petitioners herein. The fact remains that the accused numbering nine formed into an unlawful assembly with the common object of preventing the defacto complainant from keeping pongal. With this common object, they had come to the place and, therefore, if anyone of the member of the unlawful assembly commits an offence, the other members will be vicariously liable for the same. This is the principle behind
Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code. In this case, it cannot be stated that there are no allegations against the petitioners warranting quashment of the charge sheet. As regards the contention that the police have only stated
Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code in the charge sheet, this Court is of the view that the charge sheet filed by the police is not the on all and end all of the case. It is the Court which has to frame the necessary charges based on the materials produced in the final report. Therefore, merely mentioning 294 of the Indian Penal Code in the charge sheet without mentioning whether it is 294(a) or 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code cannot be a reason to quash the entire charge sheet when the complaint and 161 Cr.P.C., statements prima facie implicate the petitioners.
7. In the result, this petition is devoid of merits and accordingly, it is dismissed. Whatever observed above is only for the limited extent of deciding this quash petition and the Trial Court shall proceed with the case without in any manner being influenced by the observation as stated above. However, since the petitioners are ladies, their presence before the Trial Court is dispensed with on condition that they shall appear before the Trial Court for collecting the final report and other papers under
Section 207 Cr.P.C., at the time of framing charges, for questioning under
Section 313 Cr.P.C. and on the day of judgment. On all other dates, if they file an application under
Section 317 Cr.P.C., undertaking that they will not dispute their identity and that their counsel will cross-examine the prosecution witnesses on the day they are examined in chief in their absence without adopting dilatory tactics, the Trial Court may liberally consider and entertain the same. If they adopt any dilatory tactics, it is open to the Trial Court to insist upon their presence. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate at Vilathikulam.
2.The Inspector of Police, Vilathikulam Police Station, Tuticorin District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai..