Disposed

Thirunagalingam v. State Rep. by

Madras HC8 Dec 2015CRL OP/29103/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal original petition, the petitioner sought a direction to direct the police to register a complaint regarding theft of shop materials and expedite the investigation. The court directed the respondent police to conduct the enquiry and dispose of the case within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent (Police) to conduct enquiry in C.S.R.No.550 of 2015 and dispose of the same within two months.

Thirunagalingam Vs State Rep. by — Property and Title | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 08.12.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.29103 of 2015

¶6

Thirunagalingam ... Petitioner

¶7

¶8

State rep by

¶9

1.The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Triplicane Range, Chennai.
2.Inspector of Police,
D2 Anna Salai Police Station (Crime),
Chennai. ... Respondents

¶10

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to direct the second respondent to register the petitioner's complaint dated 21.10.2015 in CSR No.550 of 2015 dated 21.10.2015 for the offences under sections 379, 406, 447 and 462 IPC and expedite the investigation within the stipulated time. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Venkatesan For Respondents : Mr.C.Emalias, Addl.Public Prosecutor ORDER

¶11

The present criminal original petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent to register the petitioner's complaint dated 21.10.2015 in CSR No.550 of 2015 for the offences under sections 379, 406, 447 and 462 IPC and expedite the investigation within the stipulated time.

¶12

It is the case of the petitioner that he owned a Bubble Tea Shop in the name of Cha Republic, for which he entered into a licence agreement with Express Infrastructure Pvt. Limited, Mount Road, Chennai on 10.9.2014. The petitioner invested more than Rs.16,00,000/- to run the tea shop and he has been paying rent regularly. While so, on 9.9.2015, the said firm sent a notice to the petitioner to vacate the premises. On receiving the said notice, the petitioner requested them to give some more time. But,

¶13

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

¶14

they refused to do so. Hence, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.5809 of 2015. Aggrieved over the same, they committed theft of the entire materials of the shop, which is worth about Rs.10,00,000/-. Hence, the petitioner lodged a complaint with the second respondent police on 21.10.2015. But, till date, no action has been taken on the said complaint. Hence, the petition.

¶15

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the complaint lodged by the petitioner dated 21.10.2015 has been assigned CSR Number as C.S.R.No.550 of 2015.

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the complaint lodged by the petitioner dated 21.10.2015 has been assigned CSR Number as C.S.R.No.550 of 2015, this Court directs the second respondent to conduct enquiry in C.S.R.No.550 of 2015 and dispose of the same in accordance with law, as early as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This criminal original petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶17

sbi
-sd/-[CS-IV]
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
/ TRUE COPY /
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Triplicane Range, Chennai.
2.Inspector of Police,
D2 Anna Salai Police Station (Crime),
Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1 CC TO MR.M.GOVINDARAJU ADVOCATE SR.NO. 66061/2015.
Crl.O.P.No.29103 of 2015
SR.[CO]
RD 29/12/2015

¶18

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

Thirunagalingam v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thirunagalingam v. State Rep. by

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

B.Kishore Karan Vs State by

S.Karthhikeyan Vs the Commissioner of Police

K. Veeramani Vs State Rep. by Its

No.90 Kattavakkam Village Vs The Superintendent of Police

Devi Vs the Commissioner of Police

V.Narayanan Vs the Inspector of Police