Madras High CourtWP Crl./76/2026disposed of

S. Arjunan v. The State Rep. By The Superintendent Of Police

2026-01-19Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA S. Arjunan, S/o.Sengoda Gounder, D.No. 13A-1, Vettuvappatty, Vellerivelli Post, Edappadi Taluk, Salem District 637 101.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The State Rep. by The Superintendent of Police Erode District.

2.The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch, Erode District.

3.Inspector of Police Erode North Police Station, Erode, Erode District. 4.N.Karuppusamy, S/o.Nallasamy Chokkanathamalai, Vellithiruppur, Anthiyur Taluk, Erode District.

Respondent(s) PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus directing the first Respondent to transfer the enquiry in G3/E-9307872/1753/2024 dated 01.02.2025 to the second respondent and consequently direct the second respondent to complete the enquiry within a stipulated time.

For Appellant(s):

Mr.B M Subash For Respondents:

Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan,

Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This Writ Petition (Criminal) has been filed to direct the first Respondent to transfer the enquiry in G3/E-9307872/1753/2024 dated 01.02.2025 to the second respondent and consequently direct the second respondent to complete the enquiry within a stipulated time.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that fourth respondent, who is running a coaching centre, by issuing advertisements and making false representations, induced the petitioner's son and several other students to enrol in his academy and made them pay substantial sums of money on the false assurance that he would secure employment in Chennai Metro Rail Limited and collected a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from the petitioner and in total, collected a sum of Rs.40,60,000/- and deceived them. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the complaint of the petitioner was taken on file and forwarded to the third respondent for enquiry, no effective action has been taken by the third respondent till date. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, on instructions, would submit that the first respondent had

forwarded the complaint of the petitioner to the third respondent and that the job racketing pertains to the period 2015-2016, the third respondent would conduct enquiry and complete the same within a period of six weeks.

4. In view of the submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the third respondent is directed to complete the enqiry within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition (Criminal) stands disposed of.

19-01-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order vrc To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Erode District.

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Erode District.

3.Inspector of Police, Erode North Police Station, Erode, Erode District.

4. The Public Prosecutor,

High Court, Madras.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

vrc 19-01-2026