Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Thangaraja, filed a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) seeking to quash the final report in CC No.759 of 2025 pending before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District. The case arose from an FIR registered on 17.09.2022 by the Inspector of Police, Panagudi Police Station, alleging that the petitioner and other accused were found in illegal possession of banned tobacco products in an Omni vehicle near AMS Fruit Shop. Upon investigation, a final report was filed and cognizance was taken. The petitioner, who is the second accused, contended that the investigation was defective. He relied on an earlier order of the Madras High Court in Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 17306 & 17312 of 2022 dated 28.09.2022, where the court, after perusing CCTV footage, found that the petitioner was not arrested at the scene of occurrence as claimed, but from his petty shop, indicating inconsistencies. Additionally, the petitioner argued that no samples were taken from the seized tobacco products and no forensic report was obtained. The Government Advocate conceded the absence of the forensic report. The court held that without the forensic report, the petitioner's culpability could not be established, and the defective investigation warranted quashing of the proceedings. The court allowed the petition and quashed the final report in CC No.759 of 2025.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of Proceedings - Defective Investigation - Section 528 BNSS, 2023 - The petitioner sought quashing of final report alleging possession of banned tobacco products - Court quashed proceedings due to absence of forensic report and inconsistencies in arrest location as noted in earlier bail order - Held that without forensic report, culpability cannot be established (Paras 1-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the final report in CC No.759 of 2025 should be quashed due to defective investigation, including the absence of a forensic report and inconsistencies in the arrest of the petitioner.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition and quashed the final report in CC No.759 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District, in respect of the petitioner. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
Law Points
- Quashing of criminal proceedings
- defective investigation
- absence of forensic report
- inconsistency in arrest location
- Section 528 BNSS 2023
Case Details
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.225 of 2026 and C.M.P.(MD)No.238 & 240 of 2026
Mr.R.Anand for Mr.S.Micheal Heldon Kumar (Petitioner), Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar (R1) Government Advocate
The State of Tamil Nadu, 1. The Inspector of Police, Panagudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District, 2. Jamal, Sub Inspector of Police, Panagudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal Original Petition seeking quashing of final report in a case involving possession of banned tobacco products.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought quashing of the final report in CC No.759 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District.
Filing Reason
The petitioner alleged defective investigation, including absence of forensic report and inconsistencies in arrest location.
Previous Decisions
In Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 17306 & 17312 of 2022 dated 28.09.2022, the court granted anticipatory bail noting inconsistencies in arrest location based on CCTV footage.
Issues
Whether the final report should be quashed due to defective investigation, specifically the absence of a forensic report.
Whether the inconsistency in the arrest location of the petitioner vitiates the prosecution case.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel argued that the investigation was defective as no samples were taken from seized tobacco products and no forensic report was obtained, and that the petitioner was arrested from his petty shop, not the scene of occurrence, as per CCTV footage.
Government Advocate conceded the absence of forensic report but argued that the accused were found in possession of 672 packets of banned tobacco products, seeking dismissal of the petition.
Ratio Decidendi
In the absence of a forensic report, the culpability of the accused cannot be duly established. Defective investigation, including inconsistencies in arrest location, warrants quashing of proceedings under Section 528 BNSS, 2023.
Judgment Excerpts
This Court is of the considered view that, in the absence of the forensic report, the culpability of the petitioner herein cannot be duly established by the investigating agency or the prosecution before the trial Court.
It is also necessary to note that, while considering the bail application filed by the petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 17306 & 17312 of 2022, this Court, upon being convinced after perusing the CCTV footage produced by the petitioner, found that the petitioner was not arrested at the scene of occurrence as claimed by the respondent police, but was in fact apprehended from his petty shop.
Procedural History
FIR registered on 17.09.2022 under Crime No.351 of 2022. Investigation completed and final report filed, taken cognizance as CC No.759 of 2025. Petitioner filed anticipatory bail petition (Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 17306 & 17312 of 2022) which was allowed on 28.09.2022. Subsequently, petitioner filed the present quash petition under Section 528 BNSS, 2023.
Acts & Sections
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS): 528
