Dismissed

M.Surya Narayanan v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC16 Nov 2021CRL OP/20892/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the petition seeking a direction to register an FIR. Relying on the Supreme Court in M. Subramaniam v. S. Janaki, the Court held that the High Court cannot use its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for FIR registration; applicants must avail alternative remedies under Sections 154(3) and 156(3) Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed as not maintainable; liberty to approach police or Magistrate under Sections 154(3) and 156(3) Cr.P.C.

M.Surya Narayanan Vs the Inspector of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 16.11.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.20892 of 2021

¶6

M.Surya Narayanan ... Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Inspector of Police, J -13, Police Station, Chennai - 600 113. ... Respondent

¶9

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondent to register the complaint dated 25.08.2021 given by the petitioner.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.P. Vijendran

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This petition has been filed to direct the respondent to register the complaint dated 25.08.2021 given by the petitioner.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶15

the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) on behalf of the respondent.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

the Division Bench in the order referred supra.

¶19