R.Pushpavathi v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.03.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA R.Pushpavathi ... Petitioner Vs.

State represented by, The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Namakkal District.

(Crime No.3/AC/ 2018) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, pleased to direct the respondent to file a final report in Crime No.3/AC/2018 dated 29.01.2018.

For Petitioner :

Mr.P.Rajavel For Respondent :

Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner/A1 has filed this petition seeking to direct the respondent Police to file a final report in Crime No.3/AC/ 2018. 1/4

2. The brief facts of the case are that the first accused/petitioner herein, who was working as a Tahsildar, Namakkal Taluk, during 22.07.2011 to 05.09.2013, is a competent authority to effect name changes in Patta and the second accused is a private individual. The second accused with an intention to grab the land belonging to Sri Arulmigu Varatharaja Perumal Temple, Pavithram Village, entered into a criminal conspiracy with the first accused and the petitioner, by abusing her position as a Public Servant and by obtaining pecuniary or undue advantage from the second accused, had framed incorrect records in the Register of Adangal and Chitta maintained at her office as well as in the Village accounts in favour of A2 and cheated the Government. Thereby, the respondent Police has registered a case in Crime No.3/AC/2018 for the offence under Sections 120B, 420, 167, 468, 471 and 477A IPC and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 r/w 109 IPC.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the First Information Report was filed during the year 2018 and the respondent is not taking effective steps to file a final report, therefore, the present petition has been filed seeking a suitable direction to the respondent to file a final report. 2/4

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the investigation in this case has been completed, however, the respondent Police are not filing the final report, whereas, they have recommended for a Tribunal Action against the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6. Recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), this Criminal Original Petition stands closed. 28.03.2024 Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking ham To

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Namakkal District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

ham 28.03.2024 4/4