Disposed

N.Nagarajan v. the State Rep by Its

Madras HC17 Aug 2021CRL OP/29176/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought to quash investigation based on factual grounds unfit for summary disposal. Court refused to exercise jurisdiction to quash but directed police to complete investigation within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent Police to expedite and complete the investigation in Crime No.116 of 2017 within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

N.Nagarajan Vs the State Rep by Its — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 17.08.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

CRL.O.P.NO.29176 OF 2018 AND CRL.M.P.NO.17092 OF 2018

N.Nagarajan

... Petitioner

.Vs.

The State Rep. by

¶10

The Inspector of Police, Nallur Police Station, Namakkal District. Crime No.116 of 2017.

¶11

N.Ponnaiyan ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER:-

¶13

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records quash the proceedings in Crime No.116 of 2017 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Nallur Police Station, Namakkal District pending disposal of the above criminal original petition and quash the same.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.C.D.Johnson

¶15

For Respondent : Mr.C.E.Pratap - R1 Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶16

: Mr.N.Manokaran - R2

¶17

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to call for the records relating in Crime No.116 of 2017 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Nallur Police Station, Namakkal District and quash the same.

¶18

The grounds raised by the counsel for the petitioner is all factual in nature and it requires appreciation of evidence

¶19

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

¶20

and this Court cannot decide the same in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code. It is left open to the petitioner to raise all the grounds before the Investigating Officer and the same shall be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings pending before the 1^st respondent Police.

¶21

It is now represented by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that without going into the merits of the case, it would suffice, if this Court issues direction to the law enforcing agency to expedite the investigation and complete the same as early as possible.

¶22

In view of the above, this Court directs the 1^st respondent Police, to expedite the investigation in Crime No.116 of 2017 and complete the same, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23

With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶26

//True Copy//

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

msrm

¶29

¶30

The Inspector of Police, Nallur Police Station, Namakkal District. Crime No.116 of 2017.

¶31

The Public Prosecutor,

¶32

Madras High Court.

¶33

+1cc to Mr.N.Manokaran, Advocate, S.R.No.41384

¶34

CRL.O.P.NO.29176 OF 2018

¶35

KSM(CO)

¶36

PBS/22/09/2021

¶37

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

N.Nagarajan v. the State Rep by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Nagarajan v. the State Rep by Its

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

N.Navin @ Navinkumar Vs State Rep.by

Anbalagan Vs the State Rep. by

S.Thiyagarajan Vs the Inspector of Police

M.Vanitha Vs N.Prabhu

Pothiskumar @ Sabari Vs the State Rep by

Rajasekar Vs State Rep.by