Disposed

S.Madhavan, M/a 42 Years, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC29 Jun 2017CRL OP/12287/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Criminal Original Petition was filed seeking a direction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for the respondent police to file a final report regarding a private complaint. The Court directed the police to investigate and file the final report within eight weeks, disposing of the petition.

What did the court decide?

The respondent police directed to file a final report in Crl.MP No.1776 of 2016 within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

S.Madhavan, M/a 42 Years, Vs the State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.06.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.12287 of 2017 and Crl.MP No.8029 of 2017

¶6

S.Madhavan, Director M/s.Indigo Business Services (India) Pvt. Ltd ... Petitioner

¶7

¶8

The State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Inspector of Police Central Crime Branch, Chennai – 600 008.

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to

¶11

direct the respondent police to file the final report before the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet in Crl.MP No.1776 of 2016.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Prakash, SC for Mr.K.Sudalaikannu For Respondent : Mr.C.Emalias, APP

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent police to file a final report in Crl.MP No.1776 of 2016 on the file of the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet.

¶15

¶16

2.It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has filed a complaint with the Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chennai alleging the commission of cyber crime by one Noel Mohan Ravin. Since no action was taken on the said complaint, the petitioner has filed a private complaint, which was taken on file as Crl.MP No.1776 of 2016 by the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai. Thereafter, by order dated 16.06.2016, the learned Magistrate has forwarded the said complaint to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Vepery, Chennai for taking steps to register a case. Pursuant to the same, the respondent police has registered a case in Crime No.183 of 2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 192, 193, 211, 420, 468, 471 and 506(2)IPC and Sections 66 and 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Though the FIR was registered on 18.07.2016, till date, final report was not filed. Hence, this petition.

¶17

Heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and

¶18

the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, who took notice for the respondent.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,

¶20

this Court directs the respondent police to investigate the case in

¶21

¶22

Crime No.183 of 2016 pending on his file and file a final report in Crl.MP.No.1776 of 2016 on the file of the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23

Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

¶24

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

29.06.2017

Index:Yes/No rk

1.The XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.

¶29

2.The Inspector of Police City Crime Branch, Chennai -8.

¶30

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

R.MAHADEVAN, J.

Crl.O.P.No.12287 of 2017

¶35

29.06.2017

S.Madhavan, M/a 42 Years, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Madhavan, M/a 42 Years, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

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

A.Varadhan @ Varadharaj, Vs the Inspector of Police

B.v.L.Ravi, Age 51 Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

Rajkumar, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

M/s.K.Sivasubramaniam Vs The Assistant Commissioner

H.Jitendar @ Jithg Vs State Represented by

C. Ramaiah, Vs M/S. Stp Limited Having at No.