M.Venkatasubbu v. The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.11.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH Crl.R.C.No.1274 of 2011 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 1.M.Venkatasubbu 2.Mahalakshmi 3.Thulasikumar
...Petitioners
-Vs1.The Inspector of Police, CCB, Team No.1, Chennai Suburban Commissionerate, St.Thomas Mount, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
2.N.Ravishnakar 3.The Inspector of Police, CBCID Chennai Metro Municipal Buildings, Alandur, Chennai.
...Respondents
(Impleaded the 3rd respondent as per the order of this Court dt:24.11.2011 in M.P.No.3 of 2011) Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records relating to the order dated 06.07.2011 made in C.M.P.No.3001 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Alandur in Crime No.176 of 2010 and set aside the same by allowing the above Criminal Revision Petition.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Mariappan For Respondents : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 & R3 : Mr.K.G.Senthil Kumar for R2
O R D E R
This case was posted today under the caption for being spoken to.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the above Criminal Revision Case was filed to challenge the order of the Court below ordering for further investigation. The learned counsel would submit that when the Criminal Revision Case was pending, the parties have reached a settlement and the dispute has been amicably resolved between the parties. Therefore, there was no requirement for conducting any further investigation in this case. However, the case has been disposed of as if the petitioner has withdrawn the Criminal Revision Case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent/ de-facto complainant would also submit that the dispute between the parties has been settled and therefore, there is no requirement for any further investigation in this case.
4. The first respondent police had earlier investigated the case and have filed a closure report before the Court below. The de-facto complainant had filed protest petition and in that protest petition, the Court below had ordered further investigation. In view of the fact that the matter already been settled between the parties, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the dispute pending and allowing the first respondent police to conduct further investigation.
5. In view of the above, the order of the Court below dated 06.07.2011, made in C.M.P.No.3001 of 2011 is hereby set aside and in view of the same, the first respondent is directed not to conduct any further investigation and an F.I.R. in Crime No.176 of 2010 and the same is hereby closed.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is disposed of with the above directions. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
vsa/rli Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IX) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Alandur.
2.-Do-Thro: The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chengalpet 3.The Inspector of Police, CCB, Team No.1, Chennai Suburban Commissionerate, St.Thomas Mount, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
4.The Inspector of Police, CBCID Chennai Metro Municipal Buildings, Alandur, Chennai.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Crl.R.C.No.1274 of 2011 MG(CO) KAK(17/12/2018)