G.Saravanan Ganeshan v. The State Represented By Superintendent Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23-03-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP No. 5532 of 2026 G.Saravanan Ganeshan Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The State, Represented by Superintendent of Police, Villupuram District.
2.Inspector of Police Gingee Police Station, Villupuram District.
Crime No. 441 of 2025.
3.The Superintendent of Police CB CID , Villupuram Unit, Villupuram District.
Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to direct the 1st respondent to withdraw the case filed in Crime No. 441 of 2025 from the file of the 2nd respondent and transfer the same to the 3rd respondent agency for fair investigation in Crime No.441/2025 and pass further suitable orders as this Court. For Petitioner(s):
Mr.R.Raghul For Respondent(s):
Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the de facto complainant to direct the 1st respondent to withdraw the case filed in Crime No. 441 of 2025 from the file of the 2nd respondent and transfer the same to the 3rd respondent agency for fair investigation in Crime No.441/2025.
2. According to the petitioner, though the case has been registered for the offence under Section 305(a) of BNS, no proper investigation has been conducted by the respondent police. The petitioner also submitted that he had made a representation on 09.01.2026 to the respondent police, stating that on 14.10.2025, the door lock of his house was broken and 5 sovereigns of gold along with cash of Rs.70,000/- were stolen. However, since the respondent police were not shown any alacrity for conducting investigation and hence, the petitioner has filed the present petition, seeking transfer of investigation.
3. Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police submitted that the 2nd respondent/Inspector of Police, Gingee Police Station, Villupuram District, has filed a status report. Based on the same, it was submitted that although a theft had occurred, no door lock or bureau was found to have been broken. The Investigating Officer visited the scene of crime of occurrence and confirmed that no locks were broken as alleged by the petitioner. 3.1. It was further submitted that one Banumathy, the owner of the house
stated in her statement that the house and bureau was locked and the key was kept at the premises itself. She also stated that 4 1⁄2 sovereigns was kept in a G.K.jewelers shop box inside the bureau, out of which only 3 sovereigns were stolen and the remaining 1 1⁄2 sovereigns was intact. Photographs in this regard have been produced and enclosed in the status report. Further, during the course of investigation, on 15.10.2025, the mother of the complainant, namely Banumathi, his brother Durai and his relative Ruthira Kumar were examined and their statements were recorded. Two witnesses of observation Mahazer witness were examined. The investigation was further carried out through mobile application eSakshya, and statements were in digital form.
3.2. It was also submitted that the Investigation Officer has nominated a police personal on 12.11.2025 and conducted enquires with the suspected persons categorised as modus operandi (M.O.) offenders within the jurisdiction of Gingee Police Station, namely Tirumurugan, Vignesh, Suriya, Saravanan and Ajith Kumar. Subsequently, on 28.01.2026, enquiries were conducted with other suspects, namely, Palraj Kumar, Ranjith, Mohan, Prasanth and Suresh. Further, on 27.02.2026, additional suspects namely, Naveen, Naveen Kumar, Manikandan were examined in connection with the theft cases and their statements were recorded. 3.3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is being conducted in a proper manner. Further, he submitted, once the suspect is
apprehended, appropriate action will be taken and the final report would be filed without undue delay.
4. Heard both sides and perused the materials the materials available on record.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and upon perusal of the status report filed by the Inspector of Police, Gingee Police Station, Villupuram District, this Court does not find any lapse or laxity in the investigation conducted by the respondent police.
6. Accordingly, this Court directs the respondent police to complete the investigation and file the final report at the earliest without any further delay.
7. With the above observations and directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.
23-03-2026 Jd Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To
1. The State,
Represented by Superintendent of Police, Villupuram District.
2.Inspector of Police Gingee Police Station, Villupuram District.
Crime No. 441 of 2025.
3.The Superintendent of Police CB CID , Villupuram Unit, Villupuram District.
4. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.
jd CRL OP No. 5532 of 2026 23-03-2026