P.Gnanavel Vs The State of Tamilnadu, rep by The Superintendent of Police

To direct the 1st respondent to transfer the investigation of the case pending before the 2nd respondent police to the 3rd respondent ie.,the Inspector of Police, CBCID, Madurai District.

¶15

1/5

¶16

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

¶17

CRL OP(MD). No.1241 of 2026

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr. K.Anbumanikandantamilsooriyan, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This Criminal Original Petition is filed to direct the 1st respondent to transfer the investigation of the case pending before the 2nd respondent police to the 3rd respondent ie., the Inspector of Police, CBCID, Madurai District.

¶21

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

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the de facto complainant, who had given a complaint before the second respondent police that on 28.08.2025, the marriage of his daughter namely Robin Theri was solemnized with one Karthick. In a very short period, the said Karthick along with his parents and sister subjected the petitioner's daughter to acute domestic violence and abuse.

¶23

2/5

¶24

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

¶25

CRL OP(MD). No.1241 of 2026

¶26

They have pledged all the jewels of the petitioner's daughter which were

¶27

given at the time of marriage and demanded additional gold jewels as dowry from the petitioner. In these circumstances, on 06.11.2025, the petitioner was informed that his daughter had died due to electrocution. The petitioner claiming that his daughter had died under suspicious circumstances, he preferred a complaint before the second respondent and FIR was registered in Crime No.332 of 2025 on the same day. However, since there is no progress in the investigation of the case, the petitioner has sought for indulgence of this Court.

¶28

Learned Government Advocate submitted that proper

¶29

investigation has been already conducted and the First Information Report was registered as Section 194(3)(iv) of BNS, but the same was later altered to Section 106 of BNS and investigation is still pending.

¶30

In view of the same, to allay the petitioner's apprehension that the proper investigation is not conducted, the second respondent is directed to conduct the investigations as expeditiously as possible and take necessary steps to obtain the postmortem report and viscera report at

¶31

3/5

¶32

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

¶33

CRL OP(MD). No.1241 of 2026

¶34

the earliest and conclude the same within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and also directed to appraise the progress of investigation every Friday to the first respondent and the first respondent is also directed to monitor the progress of the investigation.

¶35