Remanded

P.Aitha v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC12 Aug 2016CRL OP/14893/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras directed the respondent police to conduct a swift inquiry into a police complaint. If a cognizable offence is made out, the court ordered a regular case registration in line with Supreme Court precedent. The petition was closed once directions were issued.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent police to conduct inquiry expeditiously and register a case if a cognizable offence is made out.

P.Aitha Vs the Inspector of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 12.08.2016

¶3

Coram:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.14893 of 2016

¶6

P.Anitha ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The State of Tamil Nadu rep.by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Vadapalani, Chennai. ... Respondent

¶9

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct the respondent to register the case on the complaint of the petitioner dated 26.05.2016 and to investigate the matter and to file a final report before the competent court.

¶10

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent to register the case on the complaint of the petitioner dated 26.05.2016 and to investigate the matter and to file a final report before the competent court.

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

¶12

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that based on the complaint lodged by the petitioner, the petition enquiry is pending in CSR.No.159 of 2016 before the respondent.

¶13

Recording the submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the respondent police is directed to conduct enquiry expeditiously and during the course of enquiry, if any cognizable offence is made out, a regular case shall be registered, following the decision laid down by the Hon'ble

¶14

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

¶15

Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttarpradesh and Others reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1, otherwise the petition may be closed under intimation to the petitioner.

¶16

With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is closed.

¶17

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(J)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
sms
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Vadapalani, Chennai.
2.The Public Prosecutor
High Court, Madras
+1cc to Mrs.M.Chithra Gomathy, Advocate Sr.46569
Crl.O.P.No.14893 of 2016
rsy[co]
srg 12/09/2016

¶18

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

P.Aitha v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Aitha 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

S.Jayakumar Vs J.Dhanalakshmi

A.S.Rajesh Vs the State Rep.by

Leelesh Kumar Vs the State

Dr.a.C.Muthiah, Vs the Reserve Bank of India

M/S.Indus Towers Limited Vs the Superintendent of Police

J.Moitheen Abdul Kather Vs the Inspector of Police