Disposed

R.Balaji v. the Deputy Commissioner of Police

Madras HC28 Oct 2021CRL OP/20387/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 CrPC, the petitioner sought direction to register an FIR. The court directed the police to call the petitioner and the counter complainant for enquiry and proceed accordingly, granting the prayer in part.

What did the court decide?

Direct police to call petitioner and counter complainant for enquiry and proceed in accordance with law.

R.Balaji Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Police — Madras HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 28.10.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

CRL.O.P.NO.20387 OF 2021

¶6

R.Balaji ... Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Deputy Commissioner of Police, R-1, Mambalam Police Station, 1st Floor, Madley Road,

¶9

T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.

¶10

The Inspector of Police R-5 Virugambakkam Police Station Chennai 600 092.

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER:

¶13

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the 2nd respondent to register the FIR in complaint dated 12.10.2020.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to register the petitioner's complaint, dated 12.10.2021.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had sent a complaint on 26.12.2020 to the Inspector of Police, Virugambakkam Police Station. Thereafter CSR No.588 of 2021 assigned and no action has been taken so far and he is not aware about the outcome of the said complaint.

¶17

The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) submitted that the petitioner as well as the counter complainant were

¶18

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

¶19

called for enquiry. During enquiry, the petitioner submitted that he was not aware about the mortgage of the property and SARFAESI proceeding is not pending. He further submitted that from the Memorandum of Understanding produced by the counter complainant, it is seen that there is a specific clause with regard to the mortgage of the property. Further, the counter complainant had given an undertaking that he would settle the issue with the petitioner within six months, and for that reason, enquiry is kept pending.

¶20

Considering the above submission, the respondent police

¶21

is directed to call the petitioner as well as the counter complainant for enquiry and thereafter to proceed in accordance with law.

¶22

With the above directions, this Criminal Original

¶23

Petition is disposed of.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶26

//True Copy//

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

mrp/mpl

¶29

¶30

The Deputy Commissioner of Police,

¶31

R-1, Mambalam Police Station,

¶32

1st Floor, Madley Road,

¶33

T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017.

¶34

The Inspector of Police

¶35

R-5 Virugambakkam Police Station Chennai 600 092.

¶36

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶37

CRL.O.P.No.20387 of 2021

¶38

PL(CO) PM/01/12/2021

¶39

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

R.Balaji v. the Deputy Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Balaji 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

Mother of Mercy Church, Rep by Its Vs the Tashildar

M.Nagarajan Vs the State Rep.by

D.Anand Vs State Rep.by Its

Raja Vs State Rep.by Its

Ramachandran Vs State Rep by

Siva Vs State Rep by