Disposed

N.Thirunavukkarasu v. the State Rep. by

Madras HC4 Feb 2016CRL OP/1019/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal original petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Madras High Court directed the respondent police to register a case and conduct an enquiry regarding a complaint filed by the petitioner, applying the dictum from Lalitha Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P.

What did the court decide?

Directions to the respondent police to assign an appropriate number, enquire into the matter expeditiously, and register a case if a cognizable offence is made out.

N.Thirunavukkarasu Vs the State Rep. by — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 04.02.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.MALA

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.1019 of 2016

¶6

N.Thirunavukkarasu

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

Vs
1.The State Rep. By
The Inspector of Police,
Vazhaipandhal,
Vellore District.
2.The Circle Inspector of Police,
Kalavai Circle,
Vellore District. ... Respondents

¶9

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking a direction to the respondents to register a case in respect of the petitioner's complaint dated 07.05.2015 and take appropriate action in accordance with law to secure the ends of justice.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Vijayshankar For Respondents : Mr.C.Emalias Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R

¶11

The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for a direction, directing the respondents to register a case, based on the complaint given by him dated 07.05.2015.

¶12

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has given a complaint to the respondents as early as on 07.05.2015, but, however, the respondent police had not taken any steps to register a case. He further submitted that even though the petitioner has received a summon on 22.05.0215 for enquiry, till date, no enquiry has been conducted and no steps have been taken to register a case and hence, the petitioner has come forward with this petition for the above stated relief.

¶13

Resisting the same, the learned Additional Public

¶14

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

¶15

Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, enquiry is going on and hence, prays for appropriate order.

¶16

Considering the rival submission made on both sides, the respondent police is directed to assign the appropriate number and enquire the matter as expeditiously as possible and follow the dictum laid down in Lalitha Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P & others [2013 (4) Crimes 243 (SC) and register a case, if any cognizable offence is made out.

¶17

The Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with the above direction.

¶18

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS II)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
vsm
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Vazhaipandhal,
Vellore District.
2.The Circle Inspector of Police,
Kalavai Circle,
Vellore District.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.

¶19

+1cc to M/s., T. Vijayshankar, Advocate, S.R.No.7193

¶20

PPA(CO) EU(17/02/2016)

¶21

Crl.O.P.No.1019 of 2016

¶22

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

N.Thirunavukkarasu v. the State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Thirunavukkarasu v. the State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.Muthu Krishnan Vs the Inspector of Police

K.S.Subramanian Vs the Superintendent of Police

S. Munirathinam Vs the State by Inspector of

Amul Raj Vs the State Rep. by

S.Suguna Vs State by

D.Murugesan Vs the Inspector of Police