Allowed

V.Abaranji, M/A.63 Yrs v. the Commissioner of Police

Madras HC19 Mar 2018CRL OP/8261/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction to register a case based on his complaint. Court directed police to register immediately if cognizable offence is disclosed or conduct preliminary inquiry within 15 days otherwise, citing Lalita Kumari; Writ allowed with directions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to give complaint copy to SHO; SHO to register FIR if cognizable offence disclosed or conduct inquiry within 15 days if not and furnish closure report with reasons within one week.

V.Abaranji, M/A.63 Yrs Vs the Commissioner of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 19.03.2018

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.8261 of 2018

¶6

V.Abaranji

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

Vs. 1. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City, Veppery, Chennai 600 007.

¶9

The Inspector of Police (L&O) Thirumullaivoil Police Station, Chennai. ... Respondents

¶10

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to direct the second respondent herein viz the Inspector of Police, Thirumullaivoil Police Station, Chennai to register a case on the complaint given by her to the second respondent on 03.12.2017.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Vincent

¶12

For Respondents : Mr.C.Raghavan

¶13

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This petition is filed seeking a direction to the second respondent police to register a case on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 03.12.2017.

¶16

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

¶17

3.The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of a complaint given by him on 03.12.2017 to the second respondent, 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

¶18

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

¶19

disclose a cognizable offence, a preliminary enquiry has to be conducted.

¶20

The second respondent is 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.

¶21

5.In the result, the petitioner is directed to give a copy of the complaint dated 03.12.2017 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.

¶22

1)If the information received by the 2^nd respondent discloses commission of a cognizable offence, then, the same shall be forthwith registered.

¶23

2)If an information received does not disclose a cognizable offence, the 2^nd 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.

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

5)All information relating to cognizable offences whether resulting in registration of FIR or leading an inquiry must be reflected in the general diary/station diary/daily diary of the 2^nd respondent's police station.

¶27

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

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

Assistant Registrar(CS-VII)

¶30

//True Copy//

¶31

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶32

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

¶33

dna/ak

¶34

¶35

The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City, Veppery, Chennai 600 007.

¶36

The Inspector of Police (L&O) Thirumullaivoil Police Station, Chennai.

¶37

The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1 CC TO MR.T.Vincent, Advocate SR. No.21110
Crl.O.P.No.8261 of 2018
RMP(02/04/2018)

¶38

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

V.Abaranji, M/A.63 Yrs v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Abaranji, M/A.63 Yrs 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

G.Moorthy, (M/65) Vs the Inspector of Police

Mr.K.K.Devasagayam, Aged Vs the State Rep. by Its

Mr.Micheal D.S.Dowie, Vs the Commissioner of Police

Ayyannam Vs the Superintendent of Police

M.Mahendran, 30 Years Vs State by Its

Tmt.Arokiamarry Vs the Commissioner of Police