Disposed¶37

K. Thiyagarajan v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC10 Jan 2025WP(MD)/922/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ of Mandamus; Article 226; direction to police to complete enquiry on complaint dated 09.08.2024; non-consideration of representation as dereliction of ordinary duties; four-week timeline; money allegedly received and refused to be returned; threat to life; Sivagangai District police; Superintendent of Police; Additional Superintendent of Police; Inspector of Police, Sivagangai Town Police Station; private respondent Jawahar; limited prayer; no view on merits; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; Justice M. Nirmal Kumar; W.P.(MD)No.922 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 09.08.2024 and conclude the enquiry in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. ¶37

K. Thiyagarajan Vs The Superintendent of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should direct the 3rd respondent (Inspector of Police) to consider the petitioner's complaint/representation dated 09.08.2024 and complete the enquiry in a speedy manner, and take action against the 4th respondent.

¶22

Court's answer

Whenever a representation of this nature is made, the respondents are duty bound to consider it one way or the other; non-consideration amounts to dereliction of the ordinary duties of their office, justifying invocation of Article 226 to direct them to consider the representation within a stipulated time.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

Without going into the merits of the case and confining itself to the limited prayer, the Court directed the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 09.08.2024 and conclude the enquiry in accordance with law within four weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.

¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), M. Nirmal Kumar, J. — W.P.(MD)No.922 of 2025, decided 10.01.2025: Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner alleged that the 4th respondent received an amount from him, refused to return it, and threatened to take his life. His complaint dated 09.08.2024 to the 2nd respondent (Additional Superintendent of Police) was forwarded the same day to the 3rd respondent (Inspector of Police) with a direction to conduct an enquiry within five days; though the petitioner appeared, the enquiry was not completed. HELD: whenever a representation of this nature is made, the respondents are duty bound to consider it, and non-consideration amounts to dereliction of their ordinary duties, justifying invocation of Article 226; without expressing any view on the merits, the 3rd respondent was directed to consider the representation dated 09.08.2024 and conclude the enquiry in accordance with law within four weeks from receipt of a copy of the order. Writ petition disposed of.

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.922 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 10.01.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.922 of 2025

K. Thiyagarajan

... Petitioner

The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District.

¶11

The Additional Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District.

¶12

The Inspector of Police, Sivagangai Town Police Station, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶13

Jawahar

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3^rd respondent herein to complete the enquiry in a speedy manner on the complaint made by the petitioner before the 2^nd Respondent, dated 09.08.2024 which was

¶16

1/5

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.922 of 2025

¶19

forwarded to the 3^rd Respondent, dated 09.08.2024 and to take necessary action as against the 4^th Respondent and his henchmen in accordance with law, within the time frame stipulated by this Court.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Brijesh Kishore For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar (R1-R3) Additional Public Prosecutor

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 3^rd respondent herein to complete the enquiry in a speedy manner on the complaint made by the petitioner before the 2^nd Respondent, dated 09.08.2024 which was forwarded to the 3^rd Respondent, dated 09.08.2024 and to take necessary action as against the 4^th Respondent and his henchmen in accordance with law.

¶23

The contention of the petitioner is that the 4^th respondent

¶24

has received amount from the petitioner and the same was refused to return back to the petitioner. When the same was requested by the petitioner, the 4^th respondent has threatened him that they would take away his life. In this regard, the petitioner has given a complaint to the 2/5

¶25

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

¶26

2 nd

¶27

W.P.(MD)No.922 of 2025

¶28

2^nd respondent on 09.08.2024, who in turn, forwarded the same to the 3^rd respondent with a direction to conduct an enquiry within a period of five days. Though the petitioner has appeared before the 3^rd respondent for enquiry, the 3^rd respondent did not take any action to complete the enquiry. Hence, this petition has been filed.

¶29

3.This Court has not expressed any of its view with regard to

¶30

the merits of the representation made by the petitioner. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made, the respondents are duty bound to consider the same in one way or the other. Non-consideration of the same would amount to dereliction of ordinary duties of their office and as such, this Court would be justified in invoking its powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct them to consider the petitioner's representation within a stipulated time.

¶31

In view of the limited prayer sought for by the petitioner

¶32

in the petition without going into the merits of the case there shall be a direction to the 3^rd respondent to consider the representation of the

¶33

3/5

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.(MD)No.922 of 2025

¶36

petitioner, dated 09.08.2024 and conclude enquiry in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶37

5.With the above direction the Writ Petition stands disposed

¶38

of. NCC: Yes/No Index: Yes/No Internet : Yes/No PNM

¶39

10.01.2025

¶40

To 1. The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District.

¶41