Dismissed

P.N.Ragavendhran v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC22 Jun 2022CRL OP/20747/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Upon the absence of the petitioner's counsel for consecutive hearings, the Court concluded that the petitioner was not interested in the matter. Consequently, the Criminal Original Petition filed to direct police registration of a complaint was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition is dismissed on the grounds of the petitioner's lack of interest.

P.N.Ragavendhran Vs the Superintendent… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 22.06.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP

¶5

CRL.O.P.NO.20747 OF 2021

¶6

P.N.Ragavendhran ... Petitioner

¶7

.Vs.

¶8

The Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur District, District Police Office, Thiruvallur - 602 001. 2. The Inspector of Police, B2 Taluk Police Station, Thiruvallur - 602 001. ... Respondents

¶9

PRAYER:-

¶10

This Criminal Original Petition had been filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to direct the second Respondent Police to register the complaint dated 30.06.2019 given by the Petitioner pending on the file of the second Respondent.

¶11

For Petitioner : No Appearance For Respondents : Mr.L.Baskaran Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This Criminal Original Petition had been filed to direct the second Respondent Police to register the complaint dated 30.06.2019 given by the Petitioner pending on the file of the second Respondent.

¶14

When the case came up for hearing on 15.06.2022, there was no representation on behalf of the Petitioner. Therefore, the case was adjourned to 22.06.2022, under the caption "for dismissal".

¶15

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

¶16

Even today (i.e, on 22.06.2022) when the case came up for

¶17

hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the Petitioner.

¶18

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) furnished the

¶19

status report wherein it is stated that the Petitioner is alleged to have caused injuries on the opposite party. Therefore, opposite party had filed complaint before the Tamil Nadu Bar Council against the Petitioner. Since the Suit in O.S.No.286 of 2018 is pending before the learned Additional District Judge, Tiruvallur, the case was not registered by the Police.

¶20

Considering the report filed by the Prosecution and the absence of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner continuously for the previous hearings, it is found that the Petitioner is not interested in the outcome of this Petition. Therefore, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

Assistant Registrar(CS III)

¶23

//True Copy//

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

tri

¶26

¶27

The Superintendent of Police,

¶28

Thiruvallur District,

¶29

District Police Office,

¶30

Thiruvallur - 602 001.

¶31

The Inspector of Police,

¶32

B2 Taluk Police Station,

¶33

Thiruvallur - 602 001..

¶34

The Public Prosecutor,

¶35

High Court, Madras.

¶36

CRL.O.P.NO.20747 OF 2021

¶37

PM(CO)

¶38

PBS/08/07/2022

¶39

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

P.N.Ragavendhran v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.N.Ragavendhran v. the Superintendent 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

Ramesh Vs the State Rep by

Sadagopan Vs the State Repby

S. Dhanabal Vs the State Rep by

Soniya Mehaboob Mohammed Vs the State Rep by

Asha Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police

Thangamani Ramasamy Vs the State Rep by