Madras High Court
CRL OP(MD)/14040/2026 of Gurumoorthy Vs The State Of Tamilnadu Rep B on 8 October 2026
CRL OP(MD) No. 14040 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 08-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
CRL OP(MD) No. 14040 of 2026
and Crl.M.P(MD)No.13620 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD010923202026}
Gurumoorthy
S/o.Malaisamy,
No.39,
Nethaji Street,
Mettupatti,
Mallankinar,
Virudhunagar District.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Soolakkarai Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
(Crime No.268 of 2025)
2. Murugan
Zonal Deputy Tahsildar,
Virudhungar District.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records in Final Report in CC.No.170 of 2026 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar District and quash the same.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.S.KASIRAJAN
For Respondent(s):
Mr.V.SHATHURTHI RAJA,
GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE (CRL.
SIDE) FOR R1
__________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 07:27:47 pm )
CRL OP(MD) No. 14040 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by the sole accused in C.C. No. 170 of 2026, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. II, Virudhunagar, seeking to quash the charge sheet, in which the petitioner has been charged with the offences punishable under Section 21(5) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act (MMDR Act) and Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
2. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), appearing for the first respondent, brought to the notice of this Court that, at the time of taking cognizance, the trial Court had taken cognizance only of the offence punishable under Section 303(2) of the BNS.
3. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the petitioner was in possession of a valid transit pass at the relevant point of time and, therefore, the FIR ought not to have been registered.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), appearing for the first respondent, pointed out that the transit pass was valid from 1.33 p.m. to 3.33 p.m. on 15.10.2025. However, the vehicle was intercepted at 12.25 p.m. on 15.10.2025 while transporting minerals. __________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 07:27:47 pm )
CRL OP(MD) No. 14040 of 2026
5. In response, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the vehicle was intercepted only during the validity period of the transit pass, namely, at about 2.00 p.m.
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the material records.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has questioned the time at which the vehicle was intercepted by the respondent police. This is a disputed question of fact that can be determined only during trial.
8. In such circumstances, this Court finds no merit in the present petition. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. The personal appearance of the petitioner shall stand dispensed with unless specifically directed by the trial Court. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 08-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No PS __________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 07:27:47 pm )
CRL OP(MD) No. 14040 of 2026 To
1. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar District.
2. The Inspector Of Police, Soolakkarai Police Station, Virudhunagar District. __________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 07:27:47 pm )
CRL OP(MD) No. 14040 of 2026 R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J. ps CRL OP(MD) No. 14040 of 2026 08-10-2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 07:27:47 pm )