Thangarasu Vs The Inspector of Police

Thangarasu vs The Inspector of Police

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Mar 27, 2026

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1434428

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1434428
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice M. Nirmal Kumar
Decided On: Mar 27, 2026
Case Number: CRL OP/7890/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Thangarasu

Respondent

The Inspector of Police

Excerpt

.....petitioners, who are facing trial in c.c.no.2 of 2024 for the offence under sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(i) ipc have filed this petition seeking to quash the proceedings. page1 of 42. the contention of the petitioners is that they and the defactocomplainant hail from the same village. on the date of occurrence, after grazing cattle, the petitioners were bringing them back to their house. at that time, the second respondent/defacto complainant, who was engaged in some work, had obstructed the way. when the petitioners requested her to remove the obstruction, it resulted in a wordy quarrel. consequently, the present complaint has been lodged.3. it is further submitted that the defacto complainant is the aggressor,who had actually committed the offence. the petitioners had earlier lodged a complaint against the defacto complainant and others, which was registered as crime no.518 of 2022. thus, the present case is one of the case and counter case. however, the stage of the counter case was not known to the petitioners at the time of filing this petition. it is also contended that without following the police standing order 566, the charge sheet has been filed in the present case.4. the learned additional public prosecutor submitted that based on thecomplaint of the petitioner, a case in crime no.518 of 2022 was registered against the second respondent and others. the investigation in that case has been completed and the same is now pending trial in stc.no.16 of 2024 before the judicial magistrate court, titagudi. both cases are pending before the same court, and the police standing orders have been duly followed. page2 of 45. considering the submissions, this court is of the view that since it is acase and counter case, the quash petition cannot be entertained. it is for the petitioners to establish their defence before the trial court, as the matter involves disputed questions of fact, including who was the aggressor and the manner in which the occurrence.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-03-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR and CRL.MP.Nos.5620 and 5621 of 2026 1.Thangarasu 2.Baskar ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1.The Inspector of Police Cr.No.517 of 2022 2.Mookkaayi ..Respondent(s) To call for the records pertaining to a case in CC No.2/2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court Thittagudi, at Cuddalore District and quash the same. For Petitioner(s): M/s. K. Karuppaiya Mooppanar For Respondent(s): Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, Additional Public Prosecutor, for R1

ORDER

The petitioners, who are facing trial in C.C.No.2 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(i) IPC have filed this petition seeking to quash the proceedings. Page1 of 4

2. The contention of the petitioners is that they and the defacto

complainant hail from the same Village. On the date of occurrence, after grazing cattle, the petitioners were bringing them back to their house. At that time, the second respondent/defacto complainant, who was engaged in some work, had obstructed the way. When the petitioners requested her to remove the obstruction, it resulted in a wordy quarrel. Consequently, the present complaint has been lodged.

3. It is further submitted that the defacto complainant is the aggressor,

who had actually committed the offence. The petitioners had earlier lodged a complaint against the defacto complainant and others, which was registered as Crime No.518 of 2022. Thus, the present case is one of the case and counter case. However, the stage of the counter case was not known to the petitioners at the time of filing this petition. It is also contended that without following the Police Standing Order 566, the charge sheet has been filed in the present case.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that based on the

complaint of the petitioner, a case in Crime No.518 of 2022 was registered against the second respondent and others. The investigation in that case has been completed and the same is now pending trial in STC.No.16 of 2024 before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Titagudi. Both cases are pending before the same Court, and the Police Standing Orders have been duly followed. Page2 of 4

5. Considering the submissions, this Court is of the view that since it is a

case and counter case, the quash petition cannot be entertained. It is for the petitioners to establish their defence before the Trial Court, as the matter involves disputed questions of fact, including who was the aggressor and the manner in which the occurrence took place.

6. In such circumstances, both C.C.No.2 of 2024 and STC.No.16 of 2024 shall be taken up together by the Trial Court, tried simultaneously, and judgments shall be delivered on the same day by separate judgments in each case.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Index: Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No PVS To

1. The Judicial Magistrate Court Thittagudi, Cuddalore

2. The Inspector of Police Page3 of 4

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

PVS Page4 of 4

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties Thangarasu vs The Inspector of Police Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice M. Nirmal Kumar