Allowed

N.Kannan v. the Commissioner of Police

Madras HC8 Feb 2018CRL OP/3659/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras, invoking inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, directed the police to process a delayed complaint. The court mandated immediate FIR registration if a cognizable offence is disclosed or a 15-day preliminary inquiry otherwise, with strict timelines and diary entries.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to provide a copy of the complaint to the Station House Officer, who was ordered to either register the FIR or conduct a 15-day preliminary inquiry, document proceedings in

N.Kannan Vs the Commissioner of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 08.02.2018 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶4

Crl.O.P.No. 3659 of 2018

N. Kannan

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Commissioner of Police,
Greater Chennai Police,
E.V.K. Sampath Road,
Vepery, Chennai 600 007.
2. The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Kachery Road, Mylapore,
Chennai-600 004.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Kachery Road, Mylapore,
Chennai-600 004.
4. The Inspector of Police,
E-1, Mylapore Police Station,
Kachery Road, Mylapore,
Chennai-600 004. ... Respondents

¶9

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to direct the respondent to register a case based on the complaint dated 23.12.2017 wide CSR No.1500/2017 preferred by the petitioner and to investigate the same in accordance with law and to protect the life and recover the money of the petitioner.

¶10

ORDER

¶11

This petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to register a case based on the complaint dated 23.12.2017 wide CSR No.1500/2017 preferred by the petitioner and

¶12

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

¶13

to investigate the same in accordance with law and to protect the life and recover the money of the petitioner.

¶14

By consent of both sides, this Criminal Original Petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶15

The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of a complaint given by him on 23.12.2017 to the respondents, the same has been kept in abeyance without any action. It is well settled in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others [2013 (6) CTC 353], that registration of an FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure if an information furnished to the police officer disclose commission of a cognizable offence and in cases where the information does not disclose a cognizable offence, a preliminary enquiry has to be conducted.

¶16

The respondents are not justified in having received the complaint and keeping it unattended without any further action. In view of the same, the petitioner has made out a case for this Court to invoke its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

¶17

In the result, the petitioner is directed to give a copy of the complaint dated 23.12.2017 to the Station House Officer having territorial jurisdiction over the issue. On receipt of the said copy of the complaint, the concerned Station House Officer shall adhere to the following directions.

¶18

1)If the information received by the 4^th respondent discloses commission of a cognizable offence, then, the same shall be forthwith registered.

¶19

2)If an information received does not disclose a cognizable offence, the 4^th respondent shall conduct a preliminary inquiry to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed therein or not and such inquiry shall be completed within a period of fifteen days from the date of information.

¶20

If the inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the FIR must be registered, if not already registered or closed.

¶21

If the preliminary inquiry ends in closing the complaint, the closure report must be recorded along with the reasonings and a copy of the same shall be furnished to the complainant within one week.

¶22

5)All information relating to cognizable offences whether resulting in registration of FIR or

¶23

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

¶24

leading an inquiry must be reflected in the general diary/station diary/daily diary of the 4^th respondent's police station.

¶25

In the result, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed with the above directions.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(J)

¶28

//True Copy//

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar
mm
To
1. The Commissioner of Police,
Greater Chennai Police,
E.V.K. Sampath Road,
Vepery, Chennai 600 007.
2. The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Kachery Road, Mylapore,
Chennai-600 004.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Kachery Road, Mylapore,
Chennai-600 004.
4. The Inspector of Police,
E-1, Mylapore Police Station,
Kachery Road, Mylapore,
Chennai-600 004.
5. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.

¶30

Crl.O.P.No. 3659 of 2018

¶31

RRK(21/02/2018)

¶32

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

N.Kannan v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Kannan v. the Commissioner 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

D.Ravi, Aged 45 Years, Vs the Inspector of Police

B.Gunasekaran, Vs State by

Mr.a.Rajasekar, S/O.Arjunan, Vs State Rep.by Its the Inspector

Murali, Vs State by

K.Narendran Vs P.Indira

Shanmugaraja, M/A.48 Yrs Vs the Commissioner of Police