Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan noted that there was no oral or documentary evidence to substantiate the case against the three officials. Thus, noting that continued proceedings would be malafide and an abuse of the process of law, the court allowed their pleas to quash the case against them.

“Therefore, in order to substantiate the charges, there is absolutely no oral and documentary evidence as against the petitioners. The continuation of trial would not serve any purpose, since there is no basis to proceed with the charges as against the petitioners. Therefore, the continuance of proceedings as against the petitioners would tantamount to malafide and abuse of process of law forcing the petitioners to undergo the rigorous of the trial,” the court said.

The court was hearing petitions filed by three individuals – Rameshkumar, N Kuttalam, and A Mohana Kumar. The allegation against the individuals was that they had colluded with other officials and misappropriated temple funds to the tune of Rs 2,96,017 by producing forged bills during temple festivals from 2004 to 2006. A case had been registered for offences under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c) f the Prevention of Corruption Act and Sections 409, 465, 468, 471, 477A and 120(b) of the IPC.

The petitioners submitted that they were working as cashier and other posts in the temple. It was submitted that even as per the prosecution case, the Deputy Commissioner/ Executive Officer (HR & CE Department) had fabricated the bills and handed over the cheques to the petitioners for encashing the same. It was submitted that the Deputy Commissioner had threatened the other accused (including the petitioners) to sign the forged bills to claim the amounts and they had nothing to do with the alleged occurence.

It was submitted that even as per the prosecution's case, there was no oral or documentary evidence to substantiate the charge against the petitioners and the chargesheet also did not disclose any malafide intention on the part of the petitioner. It was submitted that the petitioners did not have anything to do with the Deputy Commissioner (prime accused), against whom the entire allegations had been made. Thus, it was argued that the allegations against the petitioners was fake, false, and did not constitute any offence.

The State, on the other hand, objected to the plea and pointed out that the petitioners had not disputed their signatures on the forged bill and other documents. It was submitted that there was evidence against the petitioner and it was premature to quash the entire proceedings against them. It was submitted that the veracity of the grounds raised by them could only by gone into at the time of trial and thus, the State sought to dismiss the plea.

The court noted that as per the materials available, the fabricated bills were made by the Deputy Commissioner who then compelled and threatened the other accused to sign the same. The court noted that as per the evidence available, no person had spoked against the petitioners and thus there was no material to show their involvement in the case.

Thus, the court allowed the plea and quashed the proceedings against the petitioners. The court directed the trial judge to proceed with the trial against the other accused in accordance with law. Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Hasan Mohamed Jinnah Senior Counsel assisted by Ms.J.R.Archana for Mr.K.Kandavel, Mr.A.Damodaran,Ms.A.S.Neela Narayani & Mr.G.Nareshkuma, Mr.M.Karthikeyan & Ms.T.Vanitha

Counsel for Respondents: Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar Counsel for Government of Tamilnadu (Crl.Side)

Case Title: S Rameshkumar v State

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 285

Case No: CRL OP No. 15692 of 2024