Madras High CourtCRL OP/1155/2016closed

V.Natesan v. The Inspector Of Police

2016-01-27Honourable Mr Justice R.Subbiah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.01.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH Crl.O.P.No.1155 of 2016 V.Natesan S/o. Veerakumara Chettiar .. Petitioner Vs

1. The Inspector of Police, Pelukurichi Police Station, Namakkal District.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Namakkal District, Namakkal .. Respondents Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., praying to direct the first respondent to register a case as against one Vijaya, karthikeyan, Veluchamy, Padmanaban and V.A.O. for the offence of cheating, forgery, criminal intimidation, trespass on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner dated 20.03.2015 and investigate the same by registering the case.

For Petitioner :Mr. D.Rajagopal For Respondents : Mr.C.Emalias Additional Public Prosecutor,

ORDER

The present criminal original petition has been filed to direct the first respondent to register a case based on the petitioner's complaint dated 20.03.2015.

2. The petitioner herein lodged a complaint as against one Vijaya, Karthikeyan, Veluchamy, Padmanaban and the Village Administrative Officer, on the allegation that the said persons are making an attempt to grab the land of the petitioner, which is situated in Survey No.121/1C, Pallipatti village. Though the said complaint was lodged as early as on 20.03.2015, no action has been taken on the said complaint so far. Hence, the present criminal original petition has been filed.

3. Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that a detailed enquiry was conducted on the complaint given https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

by the petitioner, and the said complaint was closed as it is in civil in nature. He has also produced a copy of the closure report and thus opposed for giving any direction. The learned counsel for the petitioner denies the same and submitted that the allegation made in the complaint clearly make out an offence of land grabbing. Thus, he sought for suitable direction.

4. Since the complaint given by the petitioner was closed, nothing survives in this petition. Therefore, the petition is dismissed, however, the petitioner is at liberty to work out his remedy under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., if he so desires.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar (J) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar mrp To:

1. The Inspector of Police, Pelukurichi Police Station, Namakkal District.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Namakkal District, Namakkal

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

1 cc to Mr.D. Rajagopal, Advocate, Sr. 4741 Crl.O.P.No.1155 of 2016 CA (CO) kk 12/2 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/