Disposed

Semraj, v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC9 Feb 2018CRL OP(MD)/1855/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner seeks CR.O.P. under CrPC Section 482 directing the 2nd respondent to register an FIR. Court records submissions and directs the respondent to expedite inquiry and register a case if cognizable offence is revealed before disposing the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directs the second respondent to expedite the enquiry and register a case if a cognizable offence is revealed.

Semraj, Vs the Superintendent of Police — Madras HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 09.02.2018

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM

¶6

CRL.O.P.(MD)No.1855 of 2018

Semraj

... Petitioner

-vs-

1.The State Rep. by its The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District.

¶11

2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruvattar Police Station, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Criminal Original petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to direct the 2^nd respondent to register F.I.R. on the basis of petitioner's complaint dated 08.01.2018.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Jeyakumaran For Respondents : Mr.Prabhu Ramachandran Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This Petition has been filed by the petitioner, to direct the second respondent to register a case based on the complaint given by the petitioner, dated 08.01.2018.

¶16

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is working as driver in the proposed accused persons company and he is having two vans and the proposed accused persons compelled the petitioner to transfer those vehicles in favor of them, against that the petitioner has lodged a complaint before the second respondent on 08.01.2018, but, so for no action has been taken.

¶17

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) has submitted that enquiry is pending.

¶18

4.Recording the aforesaid submissions, the second respondent is directed to expedite the enquiry and if the enquiry reveals any cognizable offence, then he has to register a case and proceed further in accordance with law.

¶19

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

¶20

¶21

4.With the aforesaid submissions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar(W)

¶24

/True Copy/

¶25

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶26

¶27

The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District.

¶28

2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruvattar Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

¶29

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai

¶30

+One cc to Mr.J.Jeyakumaran, Advocate, SR.No.47602

¶31

¶32

RL/5C/2P/CVC/SAR2/6/3/2018

¶33

CRL.O.P.(MD)No.1855 of 2018

¶34

09.02.2018

¶35

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

Semraj, v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Semraj, v. the Superintendent of Police

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

M.Leelavathi Vs Superindent of Police

Gopal Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

Muniyasamy Vs the Superintendent of Police

Jinna Mohammed Vs the Inspector of Police

M.Rajeshwari, Vs the Superintendent of Police

M.Arunkumar, Vs Assistant Commissioner of