Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

S.Madhan vs State Rep.by

S.Madhan vs State Rep.by

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 28, 2025
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1724313

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CRL OP/1972/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

S.Madhan

Respondent

State Rep.by

Excerpt

.....wing, adayar tiw, chennai tiw east, adayar, chennai.2. b.mohan3. jayakumar(r3 impleaded vide court orderdated 27.02.2024 in and crl.m.p.no.1430 of 2024) ... respondents prayer : criminal original petition has been filed under section 528 of bnss act, 2023/section 482 of cr.p.c., pleased to call for the records of respondent police relating to cr.no.79 of 2023 and quash the same so far as the petitioner herein. for petitioner : mr.g.mohana krishnan for r1 : mr.r.vinothraja government advocate (crl.side) for r2 : mr.s.gokulakrishnan for r3 : mr.p.rajkumar pandianorderthis criminal original petition has been filed to quash the fir in cr.no.79 of 2023 on the file of the first respondent herein.2. heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.3. the case of the prosecution is that on 05.03.2023, at about 04.15a.m, the first accused, under the influence of alcohol, drove a maruthi swift car bearing registration no.tn 11 bc 1542 in a rash and negligent manner along r.k.salai from western side towards the eastern side. when the second respondent attempted to intercept the vehicle, the accused allegedly accelerated the car and drove it into the police personnel. as a result, one of the police officers sustained injuries. hence, the complaint.4. on receipt of the complaint, the first respondent registered fir in crime no.79 of 2023 for the offences punishable under section 308, 333 and 114 of ipc and section 184 and 188 of motor vehicles act, 1988 and it is pending.5. it is seen that the fir has been registered against the driver ofthe car and other individuals who were travelling along with him. the petitioner has been arrayed as a2. the co-passengers including the petitioner have been implicated, on the ground that they were also under the influence of alcohol at the time of the incident. further, they were fully aware that the driver of the car was intoxicated and yet permitted him to operate the vehicle, which was driven in a rash and negligent.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.03.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and Crl.M.P.No.1430 of 2024 S.Madhan ... Petitioner Vs

1. State Rep.By The Inspector of Police, J-2, Traffic Investigation Wing, Adayar TIW, Chennai TIW East, Adayar, Chennai.

2. B.Mohan

3. Jayakumar

(R3 impleaded vide Court order

dated 27.02.2024 in and Crl.M.P.No.1430 of 2024) ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS Act, 2023/Section 482 of Cr.P.C., pleased to call for the records of respondent police relating to Cr.No.79 of 2023 and quash the same so far as the petitioner herein. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Mohana Krishnan For R1 : Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.side) For R2 : Mr.S.Gokulakrishnan For R3 : Mr.P.Rajkumar Pandian

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Cr.No.79 of 2023 on the file of the first respondent herein.

2. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 05.03.2023, at about 04.15

a.m, the first accused, under the influence of alcohol, drove a Maruthi Swift car bearing registration No.TN 11 BC 1542 in a rash and negligent manner along R.K.Salai from western side towards the eastern side. When the second respondent attempted to intercept the vehicle, the accused allegedly accelerated the car and drove it into the police personnel. As a result, one of the Police officers sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.

4. On receipt of the complaint, the first respondent registered FIR in Crime No.79 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Section 308, 333 and 114 of IPC and Section 184 and 188 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and it is pending.

5. It is seen that the FIR has been registered against the driver of

the car and other individuals who were travelling along with him. The petitioner has been arrayed as A2. The co-passengers including the petitioner have been implicated, on the ground that they were also under the influence of alcohol at the time of the incident. Further, they were fully aware that the driver of the car was intoxicated and yet permitted him to operate the vehicle, which was driven in a rash and negligent manner.

6. Though the co-passengers were travelling in the same car under

the influence of alcohol, there is no question of them abetting the driver to drive the car in a rash and negligent manner, especially when they were also travelling in the same car. Further, mere consumption of alcohol by the co- passengers while travelling in the vehicle does not constitute any offence. Since the injured is a police official, the first respondent registered FIR as against all the persons who were present in the car at the time of incident.

7. The first accused was arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

He also confessed before the first respondent that he only drove the car under the influence of alcohol. When the police officials intercepted the car, without stopping the car he drove the car in a rash and negligent manner and hit against one of the police official. Therefore, no offence is made out as against the petitioner and other co-passengers except the driver of the car. The allegations made in the FIR did not disclose any commission of cognizable offence as against the co-passengers of the car.

8. In view of the above, the impugned FIR cannot be sustained as

against all the passengers except the driver of the car. Accordingly, the FIR in Cr.No.79 of 2023 on the file of the first respondent is hereby quashed as against the petitioner and other co-passengers A3 to A6. The first respondent is directed to complete the investigation in Crime No.79 of 2023 and file a final report as against A1, within a period of eight weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this order.

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is closed. 28.03.2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No mn

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.

mn To

1. The Inspector of Police, J-2, Traffic Investigation Wing, Adayar TIW, Chennai TIW East, Adayar, Chennai.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 28.03.2025

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial