Allowed

P.K.Velumani v. Ashok Kumar

Madras HC2 Mar 2017CONT P/398/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with a High Court order in a criminal O.P. The respondent police argued completion of investigation but admitted failure to file the closure report before the Magistrate. The court closed the contempt petition, directing the police to file the report within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition closed with a direction to the respondent police to file the closure report before the Judicial Magistrate within two weeks.

P.K.Velumani Vs Ashok Kumar — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED 02.03.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Contempt Petition No.398 of 2017

¶6

P.K.Velumani ..Petitioner
v.
Ashok Kumar
Inspector of Police
Pallipalayam Police Station , Pallipalayam,
Namakkal District ..Respondent
Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the
Contempt of Court Act, to punish the respondent for the
non compliance of the order passed in Crl.O.P.No.13353 of
2016 dated 27.06.2016.
For Petitioner : Mr. N.Chinnaraj
For Respondent : Mr.C.Emalias, APP
O R D E R

¶7

This court passed the following order in Crl.O.P.No.13353 of 2016 on 27.06.2016:-

¶8

"4. However, the respondent-police is directed to complete the investigation and file a Final Report or a Closure Report as the case may be, expeditiously, under due intimation to the de facto complainant.

¶9

With the above direction, this petition is closed”.

¶10

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

¶11

¶12

This Contempt Petition has been filed by the

¶13

petitioner on the premise that the police have not complied with the order dated 27.06.2016.

¶14

3.Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, Mr.R.Ashok Kumar, Inspector of Police, Pallipalayam Police

¶15

Station, Namakkal District, is present.

¶16

on instructions, submitted that though no time limit was prescribed in the order dated 27.06.2016, yet, the police have completed the investigation in Crime No.112 of 2016 and have closed the case as “mistake of fact”on 29.09.2016

¶17

itself. The closure report namely R.C.S.No.33 of 2016 has

¶18

been served on the petitioner/defacto complainant on the same day.

¶19

It is represented that the police have not filed

¶20

the closure report before the Jurisdictional Magistrate.

¶21

In view of the above, this Contempt Petition is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

closed with a direction to the respondent police to file

¶23

¶24

the closure report before the Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchengode, within a period of two weeks from today.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

JOINT REGISTRAR (OS)

¶27

//Certified to be true copy//
Dated at Madras this the day of 2017.
COURT OFFICER(O.S.)
From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing
certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this
format.
CO/09/03/2017
To
1.Mr.Ashok Kumar
Inspector of Police
Pallipalayam Police Station
Namakkal District
2.the Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras-104
One CC to M/s.N.Chinnaraj,Advocate, Sr.No.3603/16

¶28

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

P.K.Velumani v. Ashok Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.K.Velumani v. Ashok Kumar

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

Sakthi Aisvarya Spinning Mill Vs State of Tamil Nadu

N.Rani Vs Tamilnadu State Transport

C.Thangaraj Vs the Commissioner

S.Vijayakumar Vs the Assistant Engineer-General

The Management of Eravancheri Vs Kunju Pillai, Podhu Cheyalalar

M/S Sua Explosives and Vs the Presiding Officer