Allowed

K.Sudhakar, v. State Rep. by

Madras HC23 Mar 2018CRL OP/9127/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Disposing of a Criminal Original Petition under Section 482 CrPC, the court directed the police station to register the FIR if a complaint disclosed a cognizable offence or conduct a preliminary inquiry within 15 days if it did not, citing Lalita Kumari.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Station House Officer to register the FIR or conduct a preliminary inquiry within 15 days based on the complaint dated 19.01.2015.

K.Sudhakar, Vs State Rep. by — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 23.03.2018

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.9127 of 2018

¶6

K.Sudhakar ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State represented by Inspector of Police S.6 Sankar Nagar Police Station Pammal Chennai – 600075 .. Respondent

¶9

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. prayed to direct the respondent to register the complaint against the proposed accused persons on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner to the respondent dated 19.01.2015 and investigate the matter in accordance with law.

¶10

For Petitioner : M/s.M.N.Balakrishnan For Respondent : Mr.C.Raghavan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER

¶11

This petition is filed for seeking a direction to the respondent to register the complaint against the proposed accused persons on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner to the respondent dated 19.01.2015 and investigate the matter in accordance with law.

¶12

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

¶13

3.The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of a complaint given by him on 19.01.2015 to the 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

¶14

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

¶15

cognizable offence and in cases where the information does not disclose a cognizable offence, a preliminary enquiry has to be conducted.

¶16

The 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.

¶17

5.In the result, the petitioner is directed to give a copy of the complaint dated 19.01.2015 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 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 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 leading an inquiry must be reflected in the general diary/station diary/daily diary of the respondent police station.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS V)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Inspector of Police
S.6 Sankar Nagar Police Station
Pammal
Chennai – 600075.
2. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.M.N.Balakrishnan, Advocate, S.R.No.22138
Crl.O.P.No.9127 of 2018
gj(CO)
GSP(17/04/2018)

¶26

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

K.Sudhakar, v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Sudhakar, v. State Rep. by

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

Sujatha, 35 Yrs, Vs N.Arulvelam

Mangai, 45 Yrs Vs the State by

S.Balakrishnan, 27 Yrs Vs the Commissioner of Police

S.Indira Vs the Inspector of Police

Mrs.G.Pachaiammal, Vs the State Rep. by

Chinnamma Vs the Superintendent of Police