Disposed

Rajasekar, S/O.Pillaimuthu v. Sub Inspector of Police, B4

Madras HC10 Jun 2015CRL OP/6775/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking quashing of a criminal complaint under S. 482 CrPC. Court recorded that final report was filed but not numbered due to officer vacancy. It closed the petition with liberty to challenge the report once cognizance is taken.

What did the court decide?

Petition closed with liberty to challenge the final report when it is numbered.

Rajasekar, S/O.Pillaimuthu Vs Sub Inspector of Police, B4 — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 10.06.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶5

Crl.OP.No.6775 of 2015

¶6

and M.P.No.1 of 2015

¶7

Rajasekar 2. Sankaranarayanan ... Petitioners/Accused 1 & 2 Vs 1. Sub Inspector of Police, B4 Police Station, Crime Branch, Coimbatore. ... 1^st Respondent/Complainant. 2. S.Arunkumar ... 2^nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶8

Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records in Cr.No.527/2014 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.

¶9

The petitioner seeks a direction to call for the records in Cr.No.527/2014 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.

¶10

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the first respondent and perused the material placed on record.

¶11

It is represented by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that investigation in Crime No.527/2014 has been completed and final report has been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Coimbatore on 30.07.2014.

¶12

Mr.Sugendran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner made an copy application before the said court and the copy application has been returned with the endorsement that no final report has been filed. In this regard, the learned

¶13

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

¶14

Additional Public Prosecutor submits that there was no Presiding Officer in Judicial Magistrate, No.III, Coimbatore and therefore, the final report has not been numbered.

¶15

Recording the submission, this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the final report as and when cognizance is taken and numbered. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶16

mrp

¶17

s/d-
Assistant Registrar(LA)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
1. Sub Inspector of Police,
B4 Police Station,
Crime Branch,
Coimbatore.
2. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+ 1 cc to Mr.S.Ramesh, Advocate SR 27976
sv(co)
prk25/6
Crl.OP.No.6775 of 2015

¶18

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

Rajasekar, S/O.Pillaimuthu v. Sub Inspector of Police, B4

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajasekar, S/O.Pillaimuthu v. Sub Inspector of Police, B4

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

S. Sabiyuthien Vs the Superintendent of

Dr.M.a.Ramasamy Vs the Inspector of Police

Dr.N.Vijayan Vs the Inspector of Police

K.Mohan Rao Vs the Commissioner of Police

P.Eswari, F/a 45 Yrs, Vs the Commissioner of Police

D.Guru Vignesh Vs State Rep. by