Allowed

Muthukrishnan v. the Deputy Superintendent of

Madras HC18 Apr 2017CRL OP(MD)/3834/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court directed police to withdraw closure report filed with the Judicial Magistrate and present it to the Special Court for SC/ST Act cases, noting the Magistrate's lack of jurisdiction post-amendment of the SC/ST Act.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to get back closure report from Judicial Magistrate and present it before the Special Court for SC/ST Act cases within two weeks.

Muthukrishnan Vs the Deputy… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 18.04.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶6

CRL.O.P.(MD)No.3834 of 2017

¶7

Muthukrishnan : Petitioner/Defacto Complainant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District.

¶10

The Inspector of Police, Cheranmahadevi Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

¶11

(Crime No.158 of 2015). : Respondents/Complainants

¶12

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents to file a final report in Crime No.158 of 2015 on the file of the second respondent police, within a time frame as fixed by this Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.R.J.Karthick

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.K.Anbarasan,

¶15

Government Advocate (Crl.side)

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

Seeking a direction to the respondents to file a final report in Crime No.158 of 2015 before the concerned forum, the petitioner has come up with this petition.

¶18

Mr.Ashish Rawat, Assistant Superintendent of Police, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District and Mr.G.Muthu Subramanian, Inspector of Police, Cheranmahadevi Police Station, Tirunelveli District, are present. On instructions, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) submitted that the investigation in Crime No.158 of 2015 was completed and the case was closed as mistake of fact. The closure report was placed before the Monitoring Committee as required by law and orders were obtained from the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Monitoring Committee on 11.07.2016. Thereafter, the police have filed the closure report before the learned Judicial Magistrate,

¶19

¶20

Cheranmahadevi, on 07.04.2017 in a routine manner, unaware of the fact that SC/ST Act has been amended and Special Courts have been invested with original jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence directly. A copy of the closure report has also been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner across the bar.

¶21

Under such circumstances, the respondents are directed to get back the closure report from the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi and present the same before the jurisdictional Special Court for SC/ST Act cases, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the concerned Special Court for SC/ST Act Cases to file a protest application, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶22

This Criminal Original Petition is closed with the above direction. Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar (T&P)

¶24

/True Copy/

¶25

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶26

¶27

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District.

¶28

The Inspector of Police, Cheranmahadevi Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

¶29

The Additional Public Prosecutor,

¶30

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶31

Copy To:-

¶32

The Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi.

¶33

The Judge, Special Court for SC/ST Act Cases, Tirunelveli District.

¶34

- 1 CC TO Mr.R.J.KARTHICK, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 52435

¶35

SML

¶36

TE/JC/SAR-IV : 27/04/2017 : 2P/7C Order made in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ CRL.O.P.(MD)No.3834 of 2017 Dated: 18.04.2017

Muthukrishnan v. the Deputy Superintendent of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muthukrishnan v. the Deputy Superintendent of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ahamed Khan Vs the Superintendent of Police

Gracelin Ebenezer Vs Suthakar Kanidurai

Karthick @ Nattu Vs the Inspector of Police

T.R.S.Subburaj Vijairam Vs Ashok Dal and Oil Mill Company

D.G.Leo Pristly @ Leo Christly Vs the Inspector of Police

N.Pappathi, Vs the Superintendent of Police