Dismissed

M.Jayakumari v. the Commissioner of Police

Madras HC21 Feb 2022CRL OP/660/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking direction to register an FIR. The court held the petition is not maintainable, relying on the M. Subramaniam judgment and Sakiri Vasu case principles, mandating the petitioner to use remedies under Sections 154(3) and 156(3) Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

None granted; petition dismissed on grounds of non-maintainable nature in light of Supreme Court precedent.

M.Jayakumari Vs the Commissioner of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 21.02.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶5

CRL.O.P.NO.660 OF 2022

¶6

M.Jayakumari ... Petitioner

¶7

.Vs.

¶8

The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City, Veppery, Chennai - 600 007.

¶9

The Inspector of Police, R.8 Vadapalani Police Station, Chennai - 600 026. ... Respondents

¶10

PRAYER:-

¶11

This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to pass an order, directing the second respondent police the Inspector of Police, R.8, Vadapalani Police Station, Chennai - 600 026 to register the complaint deed 13.08.2021 and thus render justice.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.E.Murugan For Respondents : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the second respondent police/the Inspector of Police, R.8, Vadapalani Police Station, Chennai - 600 026 to register the complaint dated 13.08.2021.

¶15

Heard the learned counsels and perused the materials available on record.

¶16

This petition is not maintainable, in view of the Order passed by a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in

¶17

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

¶18

G.Prabhakaran vs. 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 the Hon'ble Division Bench in the order referred supra.

¶19