Dismissed¶25

Mr.Balasingham v. Deputy Superintendent of Police

Madras HC20 Jun 2025CRL OP/17756/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; Crl.O.P.No.17756 of 2025; D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY J.; decided 20.06.2025; Section 528 BNSS; Vigilance and Anti Corruption; Cr.No.7 of 2024; FIR No.7 of 2024; Nilgiris District; surprise check; witness seeking to retract statement; complaint/representation dated 29.04.2025; witness cannot be left out; prayer available only to an accused; connected Crl.O.P No. 8901 of 2025; six-month investigation direction; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

A witness in a criminal case cannot be left out of the case; a prayer to be left out can be made only by an accused, and the petitioner is not an accused in Crime No. 7 of 2024. ¶19

Mr.Balasingham Vs Deputy Superintendent of Police — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.17756 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 20.06.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.17756 of 2025

Balasingham

... Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The State rep.by its Deputy Superintendent of Police Nilgiris District.

¶11

2.The Director Vigilance and Anti Corruption No.293, MKN Road Alandur, Chennai – 600 016. (Cr.No.7 of 2024) ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to issue a direction to the 2^nd respondent to enquire the complaint dated 29.04.2025 and direct the 1^st respondent to investigate the FIR No.7 of 2024 and give the proper final report and pass such further or other orders.

¶13

For the petitioner : Mr.Abdul Rahman For the respondents : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor

¶14

Page No.1 of 4

¶15

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

¶16

Crl.O.P.No.17756 of 2025

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This Criminal Original petition is filed to direct the respondents to enquire the complaint dated 29.04.2025 and direct the 1^st respondent to investigate the First Information Report No. 7 of 2024, and submit the proper final report and to pass such further or other orders.

¶19

When the matter came up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that there was a surprise check, during which an extra amount of cash was found and the petitioner was one of the witnesses in the case. Therefore, now from the contents of the representation dated 29.04.2025, it can be seen that the petitioner wants to retract from his earlier statement. The representation only prays to leave him out of the case. If the petitioner is a witness, he cannot be left out. Such a prayer can be made if only he is an accused. The petitioner is not an accused in Crime No. 7 of 2024.

¶20

As far as the prayer to complete the investigation is concerned, already in a connected Crl.O.P No. 8901 of 2025, this Court has directed the respondent therein to complete the investigation expeditiously within a period of six months. Therefore, that direction has already been granted by this Court.

¶21

Page No.2 of 4

¶22

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

¶23

Crl.O.P.No.17756 of 2025

¶24