logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 6177 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Case No : Crl.R.C.(MD) No. 1292 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L. VICTORIA GOWRI
Parties : V. Murugan Versus N. Mani & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: M. Karunanithi, Advocate. For the Respondent: R29, C. Susikumar, Government Advocate (Crl. Side), R30, M/s.M.R. Priyanka Jothi, Government Advocate (Civil Side).
Date of Judgment : 07-08-2026
Head Note :-
BNSS - Section 175 (3) -
Judgment :-

(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 438 r/w 442 B.N.S.S., to call for the records of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Theni made in Crl.M.P.No. 69 of 2026 by order dated 13.07.2026 and set aside the order of the Courts below.)

1. Challenging the impugned order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Theni made in Crl.M.P.No. 69 of 2026 by order dated 13.07.2026 where the learned trial Court had dismissed the petition filed under Section 175 (3) of BNSS, this criminal revision case is filed.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that certain properties belonging to Sri Cholaimalai Ayyanar Temple, Sri Guruveerappa Ayyanar Temple, Sri Vinayagar Temple and Sri Veerappa Ayyanar Temple situated in Theni district have been illegally sold. Pursuant to which, the petitioner had given a complaint to the respondent police, and thereafter a representation to the jurisdictional Superintendent of Police. Pursuant to which, had filed the aforesaid Crl.M.P. before the learned trial Court. However, the same was dismissed without application of mind. Hence, he sought the indulgence of this Court.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the respondent police had already conducted an enquiry and had ensured that the temples mentioned by the petitioner are all HRCE temple and it is also pointed out that the petitioner may be at liberty to lodge a complaint afresh. Pursuant to which, the respondent police will take necessary action.

4. Heard the learned counsels on either side and carefully perused the materials available on record.

5. The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Theni District is suo motu impleaded as 30th respondent.

6. The petitioner is directed to forthwith submit a fresh representation to the 30th respondent as well as to the respondent police. On receipt of the same, the 30th respondent is directed to lodge a complaint in this regard, if the petitioner's contention is found to be genuine. On the receipt of the complaint from the 30th respondent, the respondent police is directed to conduct the investigation and conclude the same, within a period of four (4) weeks thereafter, by putting the petitioner and all the proposed accused on notice.

7. With the above directions, this Criminal Revision Case stands disposed of.
 
  CDJLawJournal