Dismissed

Ananda Natesan, 44 Years, v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC4 Jul 2014CRL OP/25427/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Cr.O.P. filed under Section 482 CrPC to direct registration of a complaint, this Court observed that the second respondent police had filed a closure report. Holding that the prayer could not be granted in view of the police findings, the Court dismissed the petition, though the petitioner could approach the appropriate forum if aggrieved.

What did the court decide?

The prayer to direct registration of the complaint was dismissed; the petitioner is at liberty to proceed before the appropriate forum if aggrieved.

Ananda Natesan, 44 Years, Vs the Superintendent of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | 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.25427 of 2013

¶6

Ananda Natesan ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Cuddalore District.
2. The Inspector of Police,
District Crime Police,
Manjakuppam,
Cuddalore - 1. ... Respondents
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to direct the respondents
police to register the complaint dated 12.06.2013 given by the
petitioner.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.N.P.Kumar
For Respondents : Mr.V.Arul,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
O R D E R

¶9

This petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for a direction to the respondents police to register the petitioner's complaint dated 12.06.2013.

¶10

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents. This Court has also perused the records.

¶11

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:-

¶12

"tprhuiz Kot[:- ,k;kD rk;ke;jkhf tprhuiz bra;jjpy; vjph;kDjhuh; yhf;fhpy; itj;J guhkhpf;fg;gl;l bghUs;fs; jd;DilaJ vd;Wk;. jdf;Fk; jdJ fztUf;Fkhd gpur;rpid

¶13

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

¶14

vd;gjdhy; ePjpkd;wk; K:yk; epthuzk; njof;bfhs;tjhf bjhptpj;Js;shh;/ kDjhuh; yhf;fhpy; itj;J guhkhpf;fg;gl;l bghUs;fs; jd;DilaJ vd vjph;kDjhuh; bgha;ahf Twpajhft[k;. yhf;fh; fzf;fpy; ,izf;fg;gl;oUe;j jd;Dila bgahpid ePf;fk; bra;jJ bjhlh;ghf t';fp nky; mjpfhhpfsplk; g[fhh; bfhLj;Jk; ePjpkd;wk; K:yk; eltof;if njof;bfhs;tjhf vGjp bfhLj;Js;shh;/ vdnt ,k;kDkPJ nky; eltof;if iftplg;gl;L kDit nfhh;it bra;a[k;go nfl;Lf;bfhs;fpnwd;/ "

¶15

In view of the above findings given by the second
respondent police, the prayer, as sought for by the petitioner,
cannot be granted. 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.
Sd/-
Deputy Registrar (Judicial)
Dated:21.07.2014
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
jrl
To
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Cuddalore District.
2. The Inspector of Police,
District Crime Police,
Manjakuppam,
Cuddalore - 1.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court,
Madras.
Crl.O.P.No.25427 of 2013
SCD (CO)
kk 22/7

¶16

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

Ananda Natesan, 44 Years, v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ananda Natesan, 44 Years, v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

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

R.Balakrishan@Parthibaskar Vs the Commissioner of Police