Dismissed

B.Shanmugavadivu v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC21 Jan 2020CRL OP/1015/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the Petitioner's Cr. O.P. seeking direction to resume action on a closed police complaint. Relying on G.Prabakaran, the Court held that once a complaint is closed by the SHO, Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not available and no relief is granted.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition is closed. The petitioner is directed to avail any other remedy available under law.

B.Shanmugavadivu Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 21.01.2020

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM

¶5

Crl.OP.No.1015 of 2020

¶6

B.Shanmugavadivu .. Petitioner

¶7

-vs-

¶8

1.The State of Tamilnadu,

¶9

Rep. by its

¶10

The Commissioner of Police,

¶11

Tirupur City Police, Tirupur.

¶12

2.The Inspector of Police, 15, Velampalayam Police Station, Tirupur City. .. Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Criminal Original petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to direct the respondents to take actions on the petitioner's complaint dated 29.03.2019 vide CSR.No.122/18 dated 29.03.2019.

¶14

For Petitioners : Mr.T.Nixon

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the respondents to take actions on the petitioner's complaint dated 29.03.2019 vide CSR.No.122/19 dated 29.03.2019.

¶18

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioner has not lodged any complaint. On the contrary, the petitioner's husband Boopathy has lodged a complaint on 29.03.2019 and after receipt of the said complaiZsnt, CSR.No.122/2019 was issued. He further submitted that after enquiry, the said CSR was closed on 25.06.2019.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent without making any enquiry, they have mechanically closed the petitioner's complaint.

¶20

In G.Prabakaran Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur in (Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13681 of 2018 batch) a Division Bench of this Court has held that once a complaint is closed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ by the SHO, the informant cannot invoke Section 482 of

¶21

Cr.P.C., as the remedy lies elsewhere. Therefore, no relief can be granted in this petition.

¶22

With the aforesaid reasons, this Criminal Original Petition is closed. It is open to the petitioner to avail any other remedy which is available under law.

¶23

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VI)

¶24

//True Copy//

¶25

Sub Assistant Registrar
Vv
To
1.The Commissioner of Police,
Tirupur City Police, Tirupur.
2.The Inspector of Police,
15, Velampalayam Police Station,
Tirupur City.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.T.Nixon , Advocate SR.No. 3659
CRL.O.P.No.1015 of 2020
A.SK(06/02/2020)

¶26

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

B.Shanmugavadivu v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Shanmugavadivu v. the State of Tamil Nadu

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

V.Rajkumar Vs State Rep. by

M.Muthu Saravana Kumar Vs the Commissioner of Police

Byjesh Vs State Represented by

M.Yadav Vs the State Rep by Its

P.Sundar Vs M.Muruganandam

Sreemathy Vs State Rep by