Petitioner challenged the rejection of his complaint seeking investigation. The High Court held the petition wrongly framed as the investigation was completed with an acquittal finding based on a false complaint, thus dispensing with the prayer for transfer.
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition and Connected Misc. Petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.09.2013 CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13283 of 2013 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2013
N.V.Sundaram ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.State Represented by The Superintendent of Police,
Karur District,Karur.
2.State represented by The Inspector of Police,
Police Station, Kuzhithalai,
Karur District.
3.The Investigating Officer, CBCID,
Karur District.
... Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the first respondent to transfer the investigation in Crime No.126 of 2012 on the file of the second respondent to third respondent and to further investigate and file final report as per Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. as expeditiously as possible.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Krishnasamy For Respondents : Mr.S.Prabha
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
This petition seeks transfer of investigation in Crime No.126 of 2012 on the file of the second respondent to third respondent and to further investigate and file final report as per Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. as expeditiously as possible.
2
been from time to time raising claims of ownership of the property had preferred a false complaint. No occurrence as alleged by the petitioner had taken place on 29.10.2011. The statement of the witnesses informed such position. Given such position, the Magistrate had caused notice, considered the objections raised by the petitioner and finding that the petitioner had nothing to substantiate his ownership of property or the other allegations made by him, accepted the final report. In the circumstances, the very prayer in the petition stands wrongly couched. Even otherwise there are no merits. Hence, the petition shall stand dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.
SD/Assistant Registrar /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar srm To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District,Karur. 2.The Inspector of Police, Kuzhithalai Police Station, Kuzhithalai, Karur District. 3.The Investigating Officer, CBCID,Karur District. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,Madurai Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13283 of 2013 13.09.2013 rg.08.10.2013 2p/5c
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the prayer for transfer of investigation should be allowed in light of the final report?
Whether the petition has merits given the findings of the Investigating Officer?
2 provisions across 1 enactments
N.V. Sundaram
State Represented by The Superintendent of Police, Karur
State represented by The Inspector of Police, Police Station, Kuzhithalai
The Investigating Officer, CBCID, Karur
C.T. Selvam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
