← Library
Madras High CourtWP/27034/2012disposed of

N.Srikanth v. The Director General Of Police

2021-11-22Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 22.11.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.27034 of 2012 and M.P.No.1 of 2012 N.Srikanth

...Petitioner

Vs 1.The Director General of Police, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai.

2.The Commissioner of Police, The Greater Chennai, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

3.The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch (CCB), Thousand Light, Chennai.

4.The State Rep. by Inspector of Police, J-3, Guindy Police Station, Chennai.

5.The State Rep. by Inspector of Police, J-8, Neelangkarai Police Station, Chennai.

6.The State Rep. by Inspector of Police, J-6, Thiruvanmiyur Police Station, Chennai.

7.C.Deepan 8.G.Sridhar 9.M.Raman 10.M.Laksmanan ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to change the Investigation Agency either to CBCID, SIT (Special Investigation Team) or such other appropriate agency as this Court may deem fit an proper with a direction to deal with the petitioner complaint dated 20.06.2011 in accordance with

the Law and file a report before this Court within a period of time that may be stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.Yoga Narasimhan for Mr.M.Manivasagam For Respondents : Mr.C.Jayaprakash (for R1 to R6) Government Advocate Mrs.R.Mahalakshmi (for R7) R8 to R10 - Not Ready in Notice

O R D E R

The status report filed by the 6th respondent Inspector of Police, J-6 Thiruvanmiyur Police Station, Chennai before this Court today i.e. 22.11.2021 reveals that once again the writ petitioner submitted a complaint on 14.02.2020 and the 6th respondent has registered a case in Crime No.118 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 506(ii) of IPC on 14.02.2020 itself. The case is under investigation.

2.It is contended that non-registration of a complaint already submitted by the petitioner long back in the year 2012 will be addressed and all appropriate actions would be taken with the co-operation of the petitioner. In view of the fact that the petitioner has prepared a fresh complaint, the said complaint is registered and the investigation commenced. It is further contended that the Inspector of Police has collected the details from the Cyber Crime and initiated all actions to proceed with the case.

3.This Court is of the considered opinion that in respect of the complaint originally submitted, the 6th respondent made a submission that all further actions will be initiated in respect of the lapses, negligence or dereliction of duty, if any committed by the authorities during the relevant point of time. 4.In view of the said statement in the status report, this Court directs the respondents to address the issue regarding non-registration of the case during the relevant point of time and initiate all further actions. As far as the present position is concerned, the further complaint given by the petitioner is registered and actions are initiated, thus, no further directions are required in respect of the relief sought for in the present writ petition.

5.Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar vs To 1.The Director General of Police, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai.

2.The Commissioner of Police, The Greater Chennai, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

3.The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch (CCB), Thousand Light, Chennai.

4.The Inspector of Police, J-3, Guindy Police Station, Chennai.

5.The Inspector of Police, J-8, Neelangkarai Police Station, Chennai.

6.The Inspector of Police, J-6, Thiruvanmiyur Police Station, Chennai.

+1cc to Mr.M.Manivasagam, Advocate SR.No.60120 +1cc to the Government Pleader, SR.No.60684 W.P.No.27034 of 2012 and M.P.No.1 of 2012 PMK(CO) CB(03/12/2021)