Dismissed

R.Balakrishan@Parthibaskar v. the Commissioner of Police

Madras HC4 Jul 2014CRL OP/20925/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Original Petition filing under Section 482 of CrPC seeking direction to police to register a complaint. The police had already filed a closure report after enquiry. The court dismissed the petition, allowing the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum if aggrieved by the report.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; petitioner is at liberty to proceed before the appropriate forum if aggrieved by the closure report.

R.Balakrishan@Parthibaskar Vs the Commissioner of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 4.07.2014

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHOCKALINGAM

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.20925 of 2013

¶6

and

¶7

M.P.No.4 of 2013

¶8

B.Balakrishnan @ Parthi Baskar ...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Commissioner of Police,
Land Grab Cell,
Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.
2. The Inspector of Police,
CCB, Team 18A, Egmore,
Chennai - 600 008.
3. A.K.Muthusamy
4. Ozone Projects Pvt Ltd.,
Rep. by Mr.K.Krishnan,
Authorised signatory
New No.63,
G.N.Chetty Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.
5. G.N.Pandian
6. Uma Pandian ...Respondents
[Impleaded the respondents 3 to 6 as
per order of this Court dated
28.10.2013 in M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2013]

¶9

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to direct the second respondent to register the complaint dated 02.08.2013 and investigate the same in accordance with law.

¶10

For Petitioner : No Appearance

¶11

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

For R-3 : Mr.Kuberan for M/s.Rank Associates For R-4 : Mr.P.V.Balasubramanian for M/s.BFS Legal For RR-5 & 6 : Mr.S.Thankasivan

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the second respondent police to register the complaint given by the petitioner dated 02.08.2013 and investigate the same in accordance with law.

¶15

When the matter was taken up for hearing, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

¶16

This Court heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 as well as the learned counsels appearing for the respondents 3 to 6 and also perused the records.

¶17

Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that after thorough enquiry, the complaint given by the petitioner was closed by the second respondent police. He has also submitted a closure report, in which, it is stated as follows:-

¶18

"kD tprhuiz Kot[ : - kDjhuh; nfhUk; brhj;J rk;ge;jkhf kDjhuh; ve;jbthU jha;g;gj;jpunkh mry; Mtz';fnsh rkh;g;gpf;ftpy;iy/ nkYk; kDjhuh; nkw;go , lj;jpd; nghpy; gl;lh bgw tpz;zg;gpj;J rh;nt kw;Wk; brl;oy;bkz;l; Mizah; kw;Wk; ,af;Feh; kDjhuUf;F rhjfkhf cj;jut[ gpwg;gpj;J gpd; vjph;kDjhuh;fs; commissioner of land administration mth;fsplk; Revision petition file gz;zp mjpy; vjph;kDjhuh;fSf;F rhjfkhf cj;jut[ Md epiyapy; kDjhuh; mij vjph;j;J W.P.No.12613/2001 d;go khz;g[kpF cah; ePjpkd;wj;jpy; jhf;fy; bra;J nkw;go hpl; kDthdJ fle;j 07.04.2011 y; js;Sgo Mfpa[s;sJ/ kPz;Lk; kDjhuh; mij vjph;j;J W.P.No.844/2011 d;go mg;g Py ; bra;J jw;nghJ epYitapy; cs;sJ/ nkYk; kDjhuh; nfhUk; ,lk; rk;ge;jkhf fle;j 1996 y; kDjhuh; bgw;Ws;sjhf Fwpg;gpLk; bghJ mjpfhu Mtz vz;fs; 545/1996, 553/1996, 607/1996, 668/1996, 755/1996 kw;Wk; 1550/1996 Mfpa midj;Jk; nghypahdit vd Twp kDjhuh; kw;Wk; K:d;W ngh;fs; kPJ kj;jpa Fw;wg;gphpt[ Fw;w vz; 657/2002 d;go tHf;F gjpt [ bra;ag;gl;L No.2878/2006 d;go tHf;F thpir vz; https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ bgwg;gl;L fdk; jiyik bgUefu Fw;wtpay; eLth;

¶19

ePjpkd;wk; vGk;g{hpy; tHf;F tprhuiz epYitapy; cs;sJ/ nkw;go tHf;fpy; kDjhuh; vjphp 3 Mthh;/ vjph;kDjhuh;fs; kDjhuh; nfhUk; nkw;go ,lj;ij fle;j 80 Mz;LfSf;F Kd;gpUe;J gy;ntW tpw;gidg; gj;jpu';fspd; K:yk; fpiuak; bgwg;gl;l K:jhijah; brhj;J vd;gJk; bjhpa tUfpwJ/ vjph;kDjhuh; AR.uh$nfhghyd; fle;j 31.01.2014 md;W , we;J tpl;lhh;/ nkYk; kDjhuh; nfhUk; ,lj;jpd; nghpy; vjph;kDjhuh;fshy; nghyp Mtz';fs; jahh; bra;agl;lL nkhro vJt[k; eilbgwtpy;iy/ vdnt kDjhuh; nfhUk; ,lk; rk;ge;jkhf hpl; kD epYitapy; cs;s epiyapy; rptpy; ePjpkd;wk; K:yk; epthuzk; bgw;Wf; bfhs;s kDjhuUf;F mwpt[iu tH';fg;gl;lJ/ vdnt ghh;itapy; fz;l elg;g [j;jhis nfhh;it bra;a nfhug;gLfpwJ/"

¶20

In view of the above findings given by the second
respondent police, the prayer, as sought for by the petitioner,
cannot be granted in this petition. Hence, this Criminal Original
Petition is dismissed. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by
the report of the second respondent police, he is at liberty to
proceed before the appropriate forum according to law. The
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(AD-I)
Dated: 21.07.2014
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
jrl
To
1. The Commissioner of Police,
Land Grab Cell, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.
2. The Inspector of Police,
CCB, Team 18A, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
1 CC to M/s.S.Thankasivan, Advocate SR.No.29427
1 CC to M/s.Rank Associates, Advocate SR.No.29274
1 CC to M/s.BFS Legal, Advocate SR.No.28978

¶21

SSK (CO)

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ PSI (23.07.2014)

¶23

Crl.O.P.No.20925 of 2013

R.Balakrishan@Parthibaskar v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Balakrishan@Parthibaskar v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prita Rachel Vs the Commissioner of Police

T.M. Achudhan Vs the State Rep.by

K.Karthikeyan Vs the Inspector of Police

Tmt.M.Nithya Vs the Inspector of Police

Mr.J.Mohanraj Vs the Commissioner of Police

Ananda Natesan, 44 Years, Vs the Superintendent of Police