Disposed

R. Venkataraman v. The Superintendent of police

Madras HC27 Feb 2020CRL OP(MD)/3599/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought direction to change investigation from the local police officer. The court observed that the investigating officer conducted the inquiry fairly and directed the Deputy Superintendent of Police to monitor the investigation instead of transferring the case.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Deputy Superintendent of Police to monitor the investigation instead of changing the investigating agency.

R. Venkataraman Vs The Superintendent of police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3599 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.02.2020 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶4

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3599 of 2020

¶5

1.R.Venkataraman

¶6

2.K.V.Balasubramanian ... Petitioners for Complainants

¶7

¶8

1.The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavr District, Thanjavur.

¶9

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vallam Division, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

¶10

3.The Inspector of Police, Tamil University Police Station,

¶11

Thanjavur. (Crime No.28 of 2020) ... Respondent / Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to direct the respondent No.1 to pass suitable order for change of investigation of the petitioners' complaint dated 31.01.2020 from the file of the third respondent in Crime No.28 of 2020 under Section 379 of IPC to some other agency and to recover the properties.

¶13

For Petitioners : Mr.A.Haja Mohideen

¶14

For Respondents : Mrs.S.Bharathi Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶15

ORDER

¶16

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the first respondent to pass suitable order for change of investigation of the petitioners' complaint dated 31.01.2020 from the file of the third respondent in Crime No.28 of 2020 under Section 379 of IPC to some other agency and to recover the properties.

¶17

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) for the respondent Police.

¶18

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that based on a complaint given by the second petitioner, the third https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

1/2

¶20

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3599 of 2020

¶21

respondent police has registered a case in crime No.28 of 2020 for the offence under Section 379 IPC. She would further submit that the third respondent police has duly conducted investigation in a fair manner. She would further submit that if the petitioners have any grievance against the third respondent, a direction may be issued to the second respondent to monitor the investigation.

¶22

4.At this Juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that it is suffice that a direction may be issued to the second respondent to monitor the investigation.

¶23

5.Considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), this criminal original petition stands closed. However, a direction is issued to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vallam Division, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur, to monitor the investigation done by the third respondent in Crime No.28 of 2020.

¶24

// True Copy //

¶25

¶26

1.The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavr District, Thanjavur.

¶27

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vallam Division, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

¶28

3.The Inspector of Police, Tamil University Police Station, Thanjavur.

¶29

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

¶30

+1 CC to M/s.A.HAJA MOHIDEEN, Advocate ( SR-8960[F]

¶31

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3599 of 2020 27.02.2020

¶32

vsg SDS (19.03.2020) 2P-6C

¶33

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

¶34

2/2

R. Venkataraman v. The Superintendent of police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. Venkataraman 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

R.M. Vikram Senthil Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

Paul Prabhakaran Vs The Inspector of Police

K.Ramanathan Vs The Superintendent of police

Jenifer William Vs the Regional Passport Officer

Nesa Raj Abiraham Vs The Inspector of Police

Revathi Sambasivam Vs The Inspector of Police