Allowed

J.C.Gissaram v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC22 Feb 2016CRL OP/965/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court directed the second respondent to expedite the inquiry under C.S.R. No.178 of 2015 as per Lalitha Kumari principles and register a case if a cognizable offence is made out, dismissing the concurrent criminal miscellaneous petition.

What did the court decide?

Second respondent directed to expedite inquiry under C.S.R.No.178/2015 and register case if cognizable offence is made out.

J.C.Gissaram Vs the Superintendent of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 22.02.2016

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.MALA

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.965 of 2016

¶6

and Crl.M.P.No.725 of 2016

¶7

J.C.Gissaram .. Petitioner

¶8

Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police
Office of the Superintendent of Police
Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District.
2.The Inspector of Police
C1 Police Station
Uthukottai, Thiruvallur District. .. Respondents

¶9

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to direct the 2^nd respondent to register the complaint against the proposed accused person on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 23.12.2015 and investigate the same in accordance with law.

¶10

For Petitioner :Mr.R.Arunkumar For Respondent :Mr.C.Emalias Addl. Public Prosecutor O R D E R

¶11

The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for a direction to the 2^nd respondent to register a case pertaining to the petitioner's complaint dated 23.12.2015 and investigate the same in accordance with law.

¶12

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has lodged a complaint before the respondents on 23.12.2015. But the respondents have not shown any interest to enquire the matter and register the case. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with this petition for the above stated relief.

¶13

3.At this juncture, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that on receipt of the petitioner's complaint dated 23.12.2015, C.S.R.No.178 of 2015 has been assigned and enquiry is going on.

¶14

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

¶15

4.Considering the rival submissions made on both sides, on the basis of the complaint made by the petitioner, as enquiry is going on in C.S.R.No.178 of 2015, the second respondent is directed to expedite the enquiry 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.

¶16

The Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with the above direction. In view of the order passed in Crl.O.P.No.965 of 2016, Crl.M.P.No.725 of 2016 stands dismissed. kj

¶17

s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Superintendent of Police
Office of the Superintendent of Police
Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District.
2.The Inspector of Police
C1 Police Station
Uthukottai, Thiruvallur District.
3.The Public Prosecutor
High Court, Chennai.
+ 2 ccs to Mr.R.Arunkumar, Advocate SR 10759
vs(co)
prk24/2 Crl.O.P.No.965 of 2016

¶18

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

J.C.Gissaram v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J.C.Gissaram 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs.S.Loshika, W/O.Shanmugavel Vs Mr.K.Sathish Kannanan

G.Purushothaman Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

M. Sathya Narayana, Vs the Commissioner of Police

S.Babu Vs the Inspector of Police

P.Ramaiah Vs the Commissioner of Police

P.Kalarani, W/O.Palani, Vs the Inspector of Police