Dismissed

K. Sudha v. the Director of General of

Madras HC27 Mar 2019CRL OP/28143/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking transfer of a four-year-old criminal investigation to a different police station. The court held that due to the lapse of time, the transfer prayer could not be granted but directed the investigating police to complete the inquiry and file a final report within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; Police directed to complete investigation and file final report within four weeks.

K. Sudha Vs the Director of General of — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 27.03.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.28143 of 2015

¶6

K.Sudha ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.
1. The Director General of Police,
Mylapore, Chennai – 4.
2. The Additional Director General of Police,
CBCID, Egmore, Chennai – 8.

¶8

The Commissioner of Police,
Vepery, Chennai – 7.

¶9

The Inspector of Police,
K-3, Amjikarai Police Station,
Chennai - 29. ...Respondents

¶10

PRAYER:

¶11

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to direct the 1^st respondent to transfer the investigation in Crime No.1219 of 2015 on the file of the 4^th respondent police to the 2^nd respondent police under the periodic monitoring of this Hon'ble Court.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Sundaravadanam

¶13

For Respondents: Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R

¶14

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the 1^st respondent to transfer the investigation in Crime No.1219 of 2015 on the file of the 4^th respondent police to the 2^nd respondent police under the periodic monitoring of this Hon'ble Court

¶15

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

¶16

It is seen that the investigation in Crime No.1219 of 2015 is pending on the file of the 4^th respondent police. Now, almost four years have been lapsed and hence, due to the lapse of period, the prayer sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted now.

¶17

However, considering that the crime is of the year 2015, the 4^th respondent police is directed to complete the investigation in Crime No.1219 of 2015 and file a final report within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already filed.

¶18

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ssr
To
1. The Director General of Police,
Mylapore, Chennai – 4.
2. The Additional Director General of Police,
CBCID, Egmore, Chennai – 8.
3. The Commissioner of Police,
Vepery, Chennai – 7.
4. The Inspector of Police,
K-3, Amjikarai Police Station,
Chennai - 29.
5. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.T.Sundaravadanam, Advocate, S.R.No.29598

¶19

Crl.O.P.No.28143 of 2015

¶20

RV(CO) CS/13/05/2019

¶21

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

K. Sudha v. the Director of General of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Sudha v. the Director of General of

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

Srinivasa Raghavan Vs Tmt. R. Anandhi

Shanmugam, M/55 Vs S.Barathi

S.Sivaraman Vs State by

Mathialagan Vs Dr.R.Ramkumar

R.Rameshwar Rao Vs the Inspector of Police

Manikandan Vs Sujatha