Dismissed

J. Santhankumari v. State Rep by the Secretary

Madras HC9 Jan 2023WP(MD)/12841/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking mandamus for compensation and action against a police officer, directing the petitioners to approach the State Human Rights Commission instead for a proper inquiry with witness examination.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach the State Human Rights Commission with limitation excluded calculated from the filing date of the writ petition.

J. Santhankumari Vs State Rep by the… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.12841 of 2014

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 09.01.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.12841 of 2014

J.Santhanakumari

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.State Represented by its Secretary, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai.

¶11

2.The Director General of Police, Beach Road, Chennai.

¶12

3.The Commissioner of Police, O/o.the Commissioner of Police, Madurai.

¶13

4.The Inspector of Police, Annanagar Police Station, Madurai-20.

¶14

5.Rajapandi , Then the Inspector of Police, Annanagar Police Station, Madurai-20.

¶15

...Respondents

¶16

1/5

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

W.P.(MD).No.12841 of 2014

¶19

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay the adequate compensation to the petitioner and consequently direct the respondents no.1 to 3 to take appropriate actions against the respondent no.5.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah For R-1 : Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia, Special Government Pleader. For R-2 to R-4 : Mr.R.M.S.Sethuraman, Additional Public Prosecutor For R-5 : Mr.M.Saravanakumar

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The Writ Petition has been filed seeking for a Mandamus to direct the respondents to pay adequate compensation to the petitioner and consequently to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action against the fifth respondent.

¶23

From a reading of the averments made in the affidavit, there seems to

¶24

be allegations against the fifth respondent in not performing his duty and also abuse of his position as the Inspector of Police, Annanagar Police Station, Madurai. With these allegations, the petitioner ought to have approached the

¶25

2/5

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

W.P.(MD).No.12841 of 2014

¶28

State Human Rights Commission for appropriate relief as the said Commission

¶29

has been vested with powers of enquiry by way of also examining witnesses, which could not be done by this Court exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶30

In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to approach the State Human Rights Commission by filing appropriate application. When the petitioner approaches the State Human Rights Commission, the State Human Rights Commission is directed to exclude the period, namely, the date of filing of this Writ Petition till the date of this order while calculating the period of limitation.

¶31

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶32

09.01.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Lm

¶33

3/5

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

W.P.(MD).No.12841 of 2014

¶36

¶37

1.The Secretary, State, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai.

¶38

2.The Director General of Police, Beach Road, Chennai.

¶39

3.The Commissioner of Police, O/o.the Commissioner of Police, Madurai.

¶40

4.The Inspector of Police, Annanagar Police Station, Madurai-20.

¶41

5.The Registrar, Tamil Nadu State Human Rights Commission, Chennai.

¶42

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

¶43

4/5

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶45

W.P.(MD).No.12841 of 2014

¶46

K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

¶47

¶48

W.P.(MD).No.12841 of 2014

¶49

09.01.2023

¶50

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶51

5/5

J. Santhankumari v. State Rep by the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J. Santhankumari v. State Rep by the Secretary

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

V. Sriram Subramanian, Vs the Director

Sakayaraj, S/O Aruldoss, Vs Tamil Nadu Information Commi-

Periya Iyya(Died), Vs the Inspector General of

A. Sahayaselvam, Vs the District Collector

Vijayakumar Vs the Distrct Collector

R.Revanjalin Bindhu, Vs the Authorised Signatory