Dismissed

Kolanchi M. v. The District Collector

Madras HC10 Feb 2021WP/1426/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the District Collector to act against police authorities allegedly for harassment and ignoring his representation. The Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that an FIR was registered against the respondents before the representation was made, and since the matter was already under investigation, no ground

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed; no relief granted. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.

Kolanchi M. Vs The District Collector — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 10.02.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶5

W.P.NO.1426 OF 2021 AND WMP.NO.1608 OF 2021

¶6

Kolanchi ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.
1. The District Collector,
Cuddalore District.

¶8

The Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore District.

¶9

Prayer: This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent/District Collector to consider the petitioner's representation cum complaint dated 30.12.2020 and take appropriate action against the 3^rd and 4^th respondents herein as per the Tamil Nadu Police Reformation Act, 2013, within a time framt to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶10

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 30.12.2020 and take appropriate action.

¶11

The grievance of the petitioner is that a complaint was given before the respondent Police and without conducting proper enquiry, the petitioner was threatened to withdraw the complaint and he was also harassed by the respondent Police. Therefore, a representation was made to the first respondent to take action against the respondent Police.

¶12

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

¶13

The learned Additional Public prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, Ramanatham Police Station, Cuddalore have already registered an FIR in crime No.1320 of 2020 for offences under Sections 323 and 324 of IPC. In the course of investigation, the statements were recorded from the witnesses and an alteration report has also been filed before the Court below to alter the offences under Section 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(ii) IPC.

¶14

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation has been conducted effectively and there is absolutely no ground for the petitioner to make allegations against the respondent Police which are completely baseless. The learned Additional Public prosecutor further submitted that the registration of FIR and the alternative report were completed even before the representation was given by the petitioner before the first respondent and hence, there is no ground to entertain the present petition.

¶15

In view of the above development, since the complaint given by the petitioner is actively under investigation, there is no ground to entertain the present writ petition and this Writ Petition stands dismissed accordingly. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

¶16

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rli
To
1. The District Collector,
Cuddalore District.
2. The Superintendent of Police,
Cuddalore District.
3. The Public Prosecutor
High Court of Madras,
Chennai – 600 104.

¶17

W.P.No.1426 of 2021 and WMP.No.1608 of 2021 AAB(CO) CS/30/03/2021

¶18

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

Kolanchi M. v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kolanchi M. v. The District Collector

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

Senthil @ Senthil Kumar Vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by

K.Nanadagopal Chetty Vs Shivpprasadh

T.Thiyagarajan Vs State Rep by

N.Jeyachandran Vs the Village Administrative Officer

Rajeswari Vs the State Rep.by

K.Prabhakaran Vs the State Represented by