Disposed

N.S.Ziauddeen v. the Commissioner of Police

Madras HC28 Jan 2020CRL OP/31684/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the request to transfer ongoing police investigations involving alleged money transactions between the Chief Complaint and the Police to the CBI, noting the lack of serious matter. The Court directed the Law Enforcing Agency to complete the investigations within four weeks and dispose of the petitions accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Investigation directed to be completed within four weeks; transfer to CBI refused; petitions disposed of.

N.S.Ziauddeen Vs the Commissioner of Police — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 28.01.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

The HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

Crl.O.P.Nos.31684 & 31685 of 2013 and 20190 of 2018

¶6

and

¶7

Crl.M.P.No.10778 of 2018 in CRL OP.NO.20190/2018

¶8

Crl.O.P.Nos.31684 & 31685 of 2013

¶9

N.S.Ziauddeen ...Petitioner
Versus
1.The Commissioner of Police,
Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. ..1 st respondent in
Crl.O.P.Nos.31684 & 31685 of 2013
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Central Crime Branch,
(CC.Kr.Chit & FPP)
O/o Commissioner of Police,
Egmore, Chennai.
(Crime No.66 of 2012). ..2 nd respondent in
Crl.O.P.Nos.31684 of 2013
3.The Central Bureau of Investigation,
By its Joint Director,
Shastri Bhavan,
Chennai – 600 006. ..3 rd respondent
Crl.O.P.Nos.31684 & 31685 of 2013

¶10

The Inspector of Police, Royapettah Police Station, Chennai. (CR no.35/2013) ..2^nd respondent in Crl.O.P.No. 31685 of 2013

¶11

PRAYER: These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C to transfer the investigation in Crime Nos. 66 of 2012, 35 of 2013, from the file of the second respondent to third respondent to investigate and to file final report in accordance with law within stipulated time.

¶12

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

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.SU.Srinivasan

¶14

For R1 & R2 : Mr.C.Iyyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor For R3 : Mr.K.Srinivasan Special Public Prosecutor [CBCID cases]

¶15

Crl.O.P.No.20190 of 2018:

¶16

B.Jayaraman ...Petitioner/
Sole Accused
Vs.
1.The State represented by
the Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Central Crime Branch,
CCC., K.R.Chit & FPP,
Chennai.
2.N.S.Ziaudden ...Respondents
PRAYER: These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C to call for the records relating to the
CCB X Crime No.66 of 2012 pending on the file of Central Crime
Branch Chennai, [CCC.K.R.Chit & FPP] and to quash the same as
against the petitioner.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.C.M.Gunasekaran
For R1 : Mr.C.Iyyapparaj,
Additional Public Prosecutor
C O M M O N O R D E R

¶18

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.20190 of 2018 would submit that FIR in Crime No.66 of 2012 was registered on 01.02.2012 against him and even after lapse of six years, there is no progress in the investigation and the same is pending. Hence, the petitioner filed the above Crl.O.P., seeking to call for the records in Crime No.66/2012 and to quash the same as against him.

¶19

This Crl.O.P., has been filed before this Court in the year 2018. While entertaining the Crl.O.P., at the time of admission, this Court observed that “on reading of FIR, this Court does not find any prima facie materials. However, the

¶20

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

¶21

respondent police is directed to complete the investigation and file a report before this Court on 11.09.2018.”

¶22

Even thereafter, the report was not forthcoming. At this stage, Mr.C.Iyyapparaj, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that investigation will be completed within a period of four weeks.

¶23

Considering the above, this court directs the Law Enforcing Agency to complete the investigation in Crime No.66 of 2012 and file appropriate report within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Crl.O.P..20190 of 2018, is disposed of accordingly.

¶24

As far as Crl.O.P.Nos.31684 & 31685 of 2013 are concerned, these Petitions have been filed by the complainant for transfer of the investigation of Crime Nos. 66 of 2012 & 35 of 2013 from the seond respondent viz.,Assistant Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch to the third respondent viz., the Central Bureau of Investigation, on the ground that the defacto complainant filed the said complaint before the respondent police for taking action against one Jayaraman, however, even after two years, the complaint was not acted upon.

¶25

Since the issue involved in the above complaint is between Police and the defacto complaint with regard to money transaction in between them, this Court is of the view that there is no need for transfer of the investigation from 2^nd respondent to the 3^rd respondent/CBI as it involves no serious matter for transferring the case. Hence, I am not inclined to order transfer of investigation. However, this Court directs the Law Enforcing Agency to complete the investigation in Crime Nos.66 of 2012 & 35 of 2013 and file appropriate report within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Crl.O.P.Nos.31684 & 31685 of 2013 are disposed of accordingly. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶26

dua

¶27

¶28

1.The Commissioner of Police, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

¶29

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

¶30

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Central Crime Branch,
(CC.Kr.Chit & FPP)
O/o Commissioner of Police,
Egmore, Chennai.
(Crime No.66 of 2012).
3.The Central Bureau of Investigation,
By its Joint Director,
Shastri Bhavan,
Chennai – 600 006.
4.The Inspector of Police,
Royapettah Police Station,
Chennai.
(CR no.35/2013)
5.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+2ccs to Mr.SU.Srinivasan , Advocate SR.No. 6317,6318
+2ccs to Mr.C.M.Gunasekaran , Advocate SR.No. 6353,6352
Crl.O.P.Nos.31684 & 31685 of 2013 and 20190 of 2018
and
Crl.M.P.No.10778 of 2018
A.SK(29/01/2020)

¶31

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

N.S.Ziauddeen v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.S.Ziauddeen v. the 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

T.D.Naidu @ D.D.Naidu Vs the Inspector of Police

T.D.Naidu @ D.D.Naidu Vs the Inspector of Police

T.D.Naidu @ D.D.Naidu Vs the Inspector of Police

E.Shankar Vs Rajendran

Sundararajan Vs Rajendran

Lakshmi Vs the Inspector of Police