Dismissed

I. Krishnaveni v. The Director General of Police

Madras HC21 Mar 2022CRL OP(MD)/2716/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought transfer of investigation for missing jewels. Court found unsettled dispute but dismissed petition given prior settlement talks. Investigation directed within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Original Petition dismissed; investigation to be completed and final report filed within 12 weeks.

What the court decided

I. Krishnaveni Vs The Director General of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2716 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 21.03.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2716 of 2022

I.Krishnaveni

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, No.1, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Myalpore, Chennai-600 004.

¶11

2.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Alagarkovil Main Road, K.Pudur, Madurai.

¶12

3.The Inspector of Police, Thallakulam Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai. ...Respondents

¶13

Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to transfer the investigation of the case in Crime No.1694 of 2019 on the file of the third respondent/Police to Crime Branch Central Investigation Department or any other Investigating Agency.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.Niranjan S.Kumar For R1 to R3 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to transfer the investigation of the case in Crime No.1694 of 2019 on the file of the third respondent/Police to Crime Branch Central Investigation Department or any other Investigating Agency.

¶17

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

¶18

1/3

¶19

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2716 of 2022

¶20

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has lodged the complaint for missing of jewels. In fact, the petitioner also submitted CCTV Footages, which shows that her own servant namely Sasikala has stolen the jewels. On receipt of the said complaint, the third respondent has registered the case in Crime No.1694 of 2019.However, till date, there is no recovery and no charge sheet has been filed.

¶21

On perusal of the status report filed by the third respondent reveals that the said Sasikala is absconding, however, the third respondent failed to secure her and recover any jewels so far from her, though the case has been registered in the year 2019.

¶22

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that after registration of the First Information Report, there was settlement arrived between the petitioner and the accused namely Sasikala with regard to return of jewels. Therefore, the third respondent did not pursue the complaint.

¶23

However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that no such settlement was arrived between the petitioner and the accused persons, and the third respondent failed to secure her and recover the jewels.

¶24

Since there was settlement talks between the petitioner and the accused, transfer of investigation would not serve any purpose. Hence, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. However, the third respondent is directed to complete the investigation and file a final report within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. The second respondent is directed to monitor the investigation done by the third respondent.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

Assistant Registrar(AD I)

/TRUE COPY/

ssb

To:

1.The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, No.1, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Myalpore, Chennai-600 004.

¶31

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

¶32

2/3

¶33

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2716 of 2022

¶34

2.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Alagarkovil Main Road, K.Pudur, Madurai.

¶35

3.The Inspector of Police, Thallakulam Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai.

¶36

The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶37

+1 CC to M/s.NIRANJAN S KUMAR, Advocate ( SR-13590[F] dated 22/03/2022 )

¶38

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2716 of 2022 22.03.2022

¶39

MK/30.03.2022/3P/6C

¶40

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

¶41

3/3

I. Krishnaveni v. The Director General of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

I. Krishnaveni v. The Director General of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandrakala Vs The Superintendent of Police

K. Sasiraman Vs The Inspector of Police

I.Kader Batcha Vs The Inspector of Police

Sooriaprakash Vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police

Veerapandi @ Periyasamy Vs The Inspector of Police

Kumar @ Ramkumar Vs The Sub Inspector of Police