Disposed

Shanthi v. the Deputy Commissioner of Police

Madras HC4 Feb 2019CRL OP/2928/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner sought direction for further investigation. The High Court directed the 2nd respondent police officer to investigate the matter, consider the petitioner's representation, and conclude the enquiry within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directions to the 2nd respondent to investigate the matter and file a final report within three months, and for the petitioner to cooperate.

Shanthi Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 04.02.2019

¶2

CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.No.2928 of 2019

S.Shanthi

..Petitioner

1.The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Adayar Range, Adyar, Chennai-600 020.

¶7

2.The Inspector of Police, Kannagi Nagar Police Station, Chennai.

¶8

3.Vanaja ..Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to direct the 2^nd respondent to further investigate Crime No.854 of 2018 by taking on file the complaint of the petitioner dated 24.12.2018.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Jaganathan

¶10

For Respondents : Mr.T.Shunmugarajeswaran Government Advocate

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This petition has been filed to direct the 2^nd respondent to further investigate Crime No.854 of 2018 by taking on file the complaint of the petitioner dated 24.12.2018.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that after the registration of complaint in Crime No.854 of 2018 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. there is absolutely no enquiry has been conducted by the second respondent Police. Thereafter the petitioner also submitted representation dated 24.12.2018 before the first and second respondent. Even after the receipt of the same, the second respondent did not enquire into the matter, though he specifically made allegations in the complaint. Therefore, he sought for further investigation in Crime No.854 of 2018.

¶14

The learned Government Advocate would submit that now only they received post mortem report of the deceased. Though the case has been registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C., now

¶15

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

¶16

after receiving the post mortem report, investigation is going on.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the second respondent is directed to investigate the matter in Crime No.854 of 2018 also taking into consideration of the representation sent by the petitioner dated 24.12.2018 and conclude the investigation within a period of three months and file final report. The petitioner is also directed to appear before the second respondent and cooperate with the enquiry.

¶18

With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

¶19

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Adayar Range, Adyar,
Chennai-600 020.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Kannagi Nagar Police Station,
Chennai.
3.The Government Advocate
High Court of Madras.
+1cc to Mr.S.Jaganathan, Advocate sr.no.9186

¶20

Crl.O.P.No.2928 of 2019 nr 14/03/2019

¶21

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

Shanthi v. the Deputy Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanthi v. the Deputy Commissioner 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

S.Sampathkumar Vs the State Rep. by

Rahul Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

B.Shivaji Rao Age 57 Vs State Rep by

P.Shanmugam Vs State Rep. by

K.Vivekanandan Vs the State Rep by

G.Amsa Vs the Inspector of Police