Disposed

S.Srinivasan v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC9 Jun 2016CRL OP/11325/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed an Original Petition requesting directions to respondents to consider his representation for police protection due to alleged threats from an accused. The Court directed the petitioner to lodge a complaint with the Inspector of Police regarding protection and investigating threats to the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Directing the petitioner to lodge a complaint with the Inspector of Police (Law & Order) for police protection and directing the police to enquire and ensure safety.

S.Srinivasan Vs the Inspector of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 09.06.2016

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶5

Crl.O.P. No.11325 of 2016

¶6

S. Srinivasan Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1 The Inspector of Police Kattur Police Station (Crime) Dr. Nanjappa Road Coimbatore – 18

¶9

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct the respondents to consider the representation letter filed by the petitioner dated 28.04.2016 for giving adequate police protection to the petitioner.

¶10

For petitioner Mr. S. Ramajayam For respondents Mr.C.Emalias, A.P.P.

¶11

This Criminal Original Petition is filed for a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.04.2016 for giving adequate police protection to him.

¶12

2 It is seen that on the complaint given by the petitioner, a case in Crime No.271 of 2016 has been registered against one Dinesh Kumar and that the investigation is pending. Now, it is alleged by the petitioner that Dinesh Kumar is threatening him and asking him to withdraw the police complaint.

¶13

3 Under such circumstances, the petitioner is directed to go in person and lodge a complaint before the Inspector of Police, Kattur Police Station (Law & Order), seeking police protection and on such complaint being made, the said police officer is directed to enquire into the complaint and take action in accordance with law. It is made clear that if it is found that Dinesh Kumar is impeding the course of investigation, the police may even take steps to cancel his bail, if he has already been released on bail and further, the police shall also ensure that no harm befalls the petitioner.

¶14

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

¶15

This Criminal Original Petition stands closed with the above direction and observation.

¶16

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS II)

¶17

//True Copy//

¶18

Sub Assistant Registrar
cad
To
1 The Inspector of Police
Kattur Police Station (Crime)
Dr. Nanjappa Road, Coimbatore – 18
2 The Commissioner of Police, Coimbatore
3 The Public Prosecutor
High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104
4 The Inspector of Police (L & O)
Kattur Police Station
Dr. Nanjappa Road
Coimbatore - 18
+1cc to Mr.S. Ramajayam, Advocate, S.R.No.31026
NM(CO)
EU(15/06/2016)
Crl.O.P. No.11325 of 2016

¶19

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

S.Srinivasan v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Srinivasan v. the Inspector 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

I.Thiliban, S/O. Iyyappan, Vs the Superintendent of Police

Malliga Vs the Inspector of Police

K.Jayaraman Vs the Inspector of Police

Dr.S.Subbiah Vs the Commissioner of Police

S.Mohanraj Vs State Rep. by

S.Mohanraj Vs State Rep. by