Dismissed

M.Kanagaraj v. the Commissioner of Police

Madras HC4 Oct 2021CRL OP/17682/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking direction to register a complaint and investigate was dismissed as not maintainable. The Court held that the informant must pursue alternative remedies under Sections 154(3) and 156(3) CrPC following Supreme Court precedent.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; liberty granted to petitioner to pursue remedies under Sections 154(3) and 156(3) CrPC.

M.Kanagaraj Vs the Commissioner of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 04.10.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

CRL.O.P.NO.17682 OF 2021

¶6

M.Kanagaraj ....Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai City, No.132, Commissionerate Building, EVK Sampath Road, Vepery, Chennai-600 007.

¶9

The Inspector of Police, K.1,Sembium Police Station, Perambur, Chennai-600 011. ...Respondents

¶10

PRAYER:

¶11

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondents to register a case on the petitioner's complaint dated 07.12.2020 and investigate the same and file final report.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This petition has been filed to direct the respondents to register a case on the petitioner's complaint dated 07.12.2020 and investigate the same and file final report.

¶14

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶15

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

¶16

3.This petition is not maintainable, in view of the Order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in G.Prabhakaran v. The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur reported in (2018) 2 LW Crl 489. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its latest judgment rendered by a three Judge Bench in M. Subramaniam v. S. Janaki reported in (2020) 5 CTC 464, after relying upon Sakiri Vasu Case, has categorically held that the High Court cannot issue any direction for registration of FIR in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the informant has to necessarily avail of the alternative remedy provided under Section 154 (3) of Cr.P.C., and Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. Liberty is given to the petitioner to workout his remedy as per the directions issued by the Division Bench in the order referred supra.

¶17

4.This Criminal Original Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶18

Sd/-

¶19

Assistant Registrar(CS III)

¶20

//True Copy//

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

nr/sms

¶23

¶24

The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai City, No.132, Commissionerate Building, EVK Sampath Road, Vepery, Chennai-600 007.

¶25

The Inspector of Police,

¶26

K.1,Sembium Police Station, Perambur, Chennai-600 011.

¶27

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶28

+1cc to Mr.S.Pushpakaran, Advocate, S.R.No.51656

¶29

CRL.O.P.No.17682 of 2021

¶30

SV(CO) PM/27/10/2021

¶31

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

M.Kanagaraj v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Kanagaraj 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.P.Moorthy Vs the Inspector of Police

Mohamed Shahid Vs Superintendent of Police

R.Krishnamoorthy Vs the State Rep by

Deepak@ Danny Vs the State Repby

Antony Mary Vs the Superintendent of Police

Thirunavukarasu Vs State Rep by