V.Azhagamuthu v. Periannan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 31.03.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE P.DEVADASS CONT.P.No.2101 of 2014 V.Azhagamuthu .. Petitioner

Versus

1. Thiru Kalaniappan Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Perambalur.

2. Thiru Sivasubramanian, Sub Inspector of Police, Mangalamedu Police Station, Perambalur District.

.. Respondents PRAYER : Contempt Petition filed under Sections 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 70/71 to punish the respondents for having committed contempt of court for disobeying the order dated 19.09.2013 made in Crl.O.P.No.22974 of 2013. For Petitioner :

Mr. C.Vediappan for C.S.Associates For Respondent :

Mr. V.Arul Government Advocate(Crl. Side) * * * * *

O R D E R

This contempt action has been initiated by the complainant with reference to this Court's Order dated 19.09.2013 passed in Crl.O.P.No.22974 of 2013 and subsequently time has been extended by this Court by its Order dated 15.09.2014.

2.

Today, Mr.Periannan, now Assistant Commissioner of Police, Thilaga Thidal, Madurai present.

3. Petitioner Azhagamuthu came forward to this Court seeking a direction under section 482 Cr.P.C. in Crl.O.P.No.22974 of 2013.

This Court directed the respondent police to conduct investigation within a prescribed time. Subsequently, on the request of the respondent police time was extended to two months from 15.09.2014. This time expired on 15.11.2014.

4. However, before that on 08.11.2014, the respondent police filed report before the Jurisdiction Magistrate, namely, Judicial Magistrate, Perambalur to the effect that further action was dropped detailing reasons for the same. It is seen from the case diary that the referred charge sheet in the printed form has been served upon Azhagamuthu and his signature has been obtained.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as on date the petitioner has not received the copy of the same. It is a matter to be verified by the learned counsel with his client. However, a copy of the negative report is also furnished to him today.

6. In the circumstances, the learned Magistrate has to consider the report and take further action in accordance with law after giving notice to the defacto

complainant and if he wishes he can file a protest petition, if he is so advised. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate has to proceed with the protest petition in accordance with law.

7. Thus, this Contempt Petition is closed.

SD/- JOINT REGISTRAR(OS) vrc //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2016. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

SS/CO/14/06/2016 To

1. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Perambalur.

2. Judicial Magistrate, Perambalur.

3. Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

One CC to M/s.C.S.Associates, Sr.No.4314/2016.