Dismissed¶31

Samuel Christain v. The Commissioner of Police

Madras HC29 Jan 2026CRL OP/1752/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer of investigation to CBCID; closure report dated 03.04.2025; Section 528 BNSS, 2023; Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.; Crl.MP.No.66875 of 2024; XIV Metropolitan Magistrate Court Egmore; F-4 Thousand Lights Police Station; Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai; complaint against T.M.Akash dated 02.08.2024; Samuel Christain; prayer declined; petition stands closed; liberty to challenge closure report; Madras High Court; 29.01.2026.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; the prayer for transfer of investigation to CBCID and a time-bound final report was declined. The petitioner was left at liberty to challenge the closure report dated 03.04.2025 in the manner known to law, and the criminal original petition stands closed. ¶31

Samuel Christain Vs The Commissioner of Police — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the investigation into the petitioner's complaint dated 02.08.2024 should be transferred from the 2nd respondent (Inspector of Police, F-4, Thousand Lights Police Station) to the CBCID. +1 more

¶18

Court's answer

Since the respondent police had already filed a closure report dated 03.04.2025 before the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, closing the petitioner's complaint, the question of transfer of the petitioner's complaint does not arise.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

In view of the closure report already on file, this Court was not inclined to grant the prayer sought by the petitioner.

¶29

Key takeaways

The petitioner remains at liberty to challenge the closure report dated 03.04.2025 in the manner known to law and work out his remedy, if so advised.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Original Petition (Crl.OP.No.1752 of 2026, High Court of Judicature at Madras, A.D.Jagadish Chandira, J., 29.01.2026) filed by Samuel Christain under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, seeking transfer of investigation of his complaint dated 02.08.2024 (against one T.M.Akash) from the Inspector of Police, F-4, Thousand Lights Police Station to the CBCID, and a final report within a stipulated time. The complaint had not been acted upon; a subsequent petition under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. (Crl.MP.No.66875 of 2024, XIV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai) led to an order dated 10.01.2025 directing a detailed enquiry, following which the 2nd respondent filed a closure report dated 03.04.2025 stating that no material evidence was found. Holding that, with the complaint already closed by that report, the question of its transfer did not arise, the Court declined the prayer and closed the petition, leaving the petitioner at liberty to challenge the closure report in the manner known to law.

¶1

Crl.OP.No.1752 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 29.01.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

Crl.OP.No.1752 of 2026

Samuel Christain

...Petitioner

Vs.

The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police, E.V.K Sampath Salai, Vepery, Chennai.

¶11

The Inspector of Police, F-4, Thousand Lights Police Station, Triplicane, Chennai. ...Respondents

¶12

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 to direct the 1^st respondent police to transfer the investigation based on the complaint of the petitioner dated 02.08.2024 from the 2^nd respondent to CBCID in accordance with law and file final report within a stipulated time.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Raja For Respondents : Mr.S.Santhosh, GA(Crl. Side)

¶14

1/5

¶15

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

¶16

Crl.OP.No.1752 of 2026

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking to direct the 1^st respondent to transfer the investigation in the petitioner’s complaint dated 02.08.2024 from the file of the 2^nd respondent to CBCID in accordance with law and to consequently, file a final report within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶19

When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submitted that though the petitioner made a complaint as against one T.M.Akash on 02.08.2024, as no case was made out by the petitioner, the respondent police did not take any action on the said complaint. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. in Crl.MP.No.66875 of 2024 before the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai, seeking to direct the respondent police to register an FIR on the basis of his complaint. Pursuant to the order dated 10.01.2025 made in the said petition, directing the 2^nd respondent to conduct a detailed enquiry on the petitioner’s complaint and to proceed to file a report if any material

¶20

2/5

¶21

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

¶22

Crl.OP.No.1752 of 2026 evidence is found, the 2^nd respondent filed a closure report dated 03.04.2025

¶23

stating that after conducting due investigation, no material evidence was found to substantiate his case/claim. He further submitted that if at all the petitioner is aggrieved, he should have challenged the said report in the manner known to law. However, without doing so, filing the present petition seeking transfer of investigation on the petitioner’s complaint dated 02.08.2024 from the file of the 2^nd respondent to CBCID at this juncture is not sustainable.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶25

The facts are not in dispute. As rightly pointed out by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), when the respondent police have filed a report dated 03.04.2025 before the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai closing the complaint, the question of transfer of the petitioner’s complaint does not arise.

¶26

3/5

¶27

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

¶28

Crl.OP.No.1752 of 2026

¶29

1. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to grant the prayer

¶30

sought by the petitioner. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the said closure report dated 03.04.2025 in the manner known to law and work out his remedy in the manner to law, if so advised.

¶31