Allowed

Periyalwar v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC21 Jul 2015CRL OP(MD)/12283/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal original petition, the petitioner sought transfer of investigation to another agency citing serious apprehension against the investigating officers. The court directed the Superintendent of Police to transfer the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the Superintendent of Police to transfer the investigation from the second respondent to the third respondent or another agency.

Periyalwar Vs the Superintendent of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 21.07.2015

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12283 of 2014

¶7

Periyalwar .. Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

¶10

2.The Inspector of Police, Aruppukkottai Taluk Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

¶11

3.The Inspector of Police, CBCID, No.26D, C.Colony, Perumalpuram – 627 007, Tirunelveli District. .. Respondents

¶12

Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to transfer the investigation in Crime No.280 of 2011 on the file of the second respondent to the third respondent or any other investigating agency.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.I.Suthakaran For Respondents : Mr.K.Anbarasan Government Advocate (crl. Side)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner is the defacto complainant. Seeking transfer of investigation in Crime No.280 of 2011, the present petition has been filed.

¶16

2.As the petitioner has got serious apprehension against the officers investigating the matter and the allegations have also been made against them, this Court is inclined to transfer the investigation to some other agency.

¶17

3.Accordingly, a direction is issued to the respondent No.1 to transfer the investigation from the second respondent to the third respondent or to some other agency.

¶18

4.This Criminal Original Petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶19

/True copy/

¶20

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

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

¶23

rj2 To

¶24

1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

¶25

2.The Inspector of Police, Aruppukkottai Taluk Police Station, Virudhunagar District. 3.The Inspector of Police, CBCID, No.26D, C.Colony, Perumalpuram – 627 007, Tirunelveli District.

¶26

4.The Additional Government Pleader, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶27

+one cc to Mr.I.Suthakaran, Advocate, SR.No.40096

¶28

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12283 of 2014 21.07.2015

¶29

CSL 07/08/2015 2p/6c

¶30

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

Periyalwar v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Periyalwar v. the Superintendent 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

Saraswathi Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

S. Krishnakumar Vs the Superintendent of Police

Anil Alias Beer Mohaideen Vs the Inspector of Police

Satham Hussain Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Chinnammal Vs the Superintendent of Police

K.Mathanraj Vs the Commissioner of Police