Disposed¶46

H.Mohamed Abdul Kadar v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC4 Mar 2025WP(MD)/3417/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P(MD)No.3417 of 2025; P. Dhanabal J.; 04.03.2025; Madras High Court, Madurai Bench; Article 226; writ of mandamus; police enquiry into complaint; complaint dated 12.02.2024; proceedings C.No.128(A)/HO/SDOV/2022 dated 27.08.2021; closure of complaint; remedy to challenge closure in manner known to law; money dispute allegation; Rs.1,63,00,000/- advanced; Rs.1,30,00,000/- returned; Thanjavur; Pattukottai Taluk; Vallam Taluk; Inspector General of Police Trichy; District Collector complaint closed as mistake of fact; fourth respondent M.Thangavel; petition disposed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

No mandamus issued; writ petition disposed of with the observation that the petitioner may challenge the closure of the complaint in the manner known to law; no order as to costs. ¶46

H.Mohamed Abdul Kadar Vs The Superintendent of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.3417 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 04.03.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL

¶6

W.P(MD)No.3417 of 2025

¶7

H.Mohamed Abdul Kadar

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Superintendent of Police,

¶11

Office of the Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District.

¶12

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,

¶13

District Crime Branch,

¶14

Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District.

¶15

3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pattukottai Taluk,

¶16

Thanjavur District.

¶17

4.M.Thangavel ... Respondents

¶18

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to conduct proper enquiry and investigation in view of the proceeding in C.No.128(A)/HO/SDOV/2022, dated 27.08.2021

¶19

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

¶20

1/6

¶21

W.P(MD)No.3417 of 2025

¶22

based on the petitioner's compliant, dated 12.02.2024 and take appropriate action against the fourth respondent with regard to the complaint pending before respondents 1 and 3, within the period stipulated by this Court or other orders as this Court.

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Atham Ali

¶24

For R-1 to R-3 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶25

For R-4 : Mr.Bharathi

¶26

ORDER

¶27

The present petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to conduct proper enquiry and investigation in view of the proceeding in C.No. 128(A)/HO/SDOV/2022, dated 27.08.2021 based on the petitioner's compliant, dated 12.02.2024 and to take appropriate action against the fourth respondent with regard to the complaint pending before respondents 1 and 3.

¶28

2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit

¶29

that the petitioner is running Chappal Shop in the name of "Prince Walk"

¶30

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

¶31

2/6

¶32

W.P(MD)No.3417 of 2025

¶33

near New Bus Stand, Thanjavur District. The fourth respondent is friend of the petitioner for the past 10 years. The fourth respondent seeks financial assistance from the petitioner for purchase of property in S.Nos. 2856/1E, 2856/1 at Ammapettai, Thanjavur and the petitioner also arranged money of Rs.1,63,00,000/- through his friends and handed over to the fourth respondent on 23.11.2015. At the time of borrowal of the said amount, the fourth respondent assured to repay the principal amount and the profits thereon. Thereafter, the said properties were sold and the fourth respondent only returned a sum of Rs.1,30,00,000/- and assured to repay the remaining amount with profit. Thereafter, he failed to do so. Therefore, the petitioner lodged a complaint before the Inspector General of Police, Trichy on 09.05.2022 and the same was forwarded to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vallam Taluk, Thanjavur District and the fourth respondent was also appeared on 02.07.2022 and thereafter, the same was forwarded to the first respondent. Thereafter, no action was taken. While so, on 19.09.2022, the petitioner along with Chinnapudhupattinam Village people gave a complaint to the District Collector against the fourth respondent for the trespasses into the agricultural land by creating forged documents and the same was closed

¶34

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

¶35

3/6

¶36

W.P(MD)No.3417 of 2025

¶37

as mistake of fact. Already the petitioner lodged several complaints but the respondents 1 and 2 kept the same without any enquiry. Already the first respondent issued proceedings in C.No.128(A)/HO/SDOV/2022, dated 27.08.2021 based on the complaint of the petitioner. But the respondents have not taken any steps. Therefore, the petitioner sent a complaint on 12.02.2024 and the same has not been considered. Hence, the petitioner filed this petition.

¶38

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the official respondents would submit that so many complaints were given by the petitioner and the same were closed as money dispute. The petitioner, frequently, used to file complaints. The above said complaint of the petitioner, dated 12.02.2024 was already considered and closed. Therefore, nothing survives for further adjudication.

¶39

4. Since this petition is filed to consider the complaint of the petitioner, dated 12.02.2024 based on the proceedings in C.No. 128(A)/HO/SDOV/2022, dated 27.08.2021 and already the said complaint of the petitioner was considered and the same was closed by

¶40

4/6

¶41

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

¶42

W.P(MD)No.3417 of 2025

¶43

the third respondent, it is for the petitioner to challenge the closure of the

¶44

complaint in the manner known to law.

¶45

5. With the above said observations, this writ petition stands