K. Nachimuthu v. The Additional Director
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 31.08.2017
CORAM
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.30433 of 2012 K.Nachimuthu ... Petitioner Vs
1. The Addl. Director General of Police, Crime Branch CID, SIDCO Electronics Complex, Block No.3, 1st Floor, Guindy Industrial Estate, Chennai-600 032.
2. The Superintendent of Police, Thiruppur District, Thiruppur.
3. The Inspector of Police, Kundadam Police Station, Kundadam, Tharapuram Taluk, Thiruppur District.
... Respondents Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to transfer the investigation of Crime No.262 of 2012 on the file of the third respondent to CBCID and consequently direct the CBCID, Chennai to file a final report within the time frame as directed by this court.
For Petitioner : Ms.Anunitha for M/s. M.Christopher For Respondents : Mr.B.Ramesh Babu, Government Advocate (CS) ----
O R D E R
This petition has been filed by the defacto complainant seeking to transfer the investigation of Crime No.262 of 2012 on the file of the third respondent to CBCID and consequently direct the CBCID, Chennai to file a final report within the time frame as directed by this court.
2. Brief facts which are leading to file this petition are as follows:- The petitioner belonged to Arunthathiyar Community and he and his family members are working as agricultural cooli under one Muthukutty Naikkar. They used to work in the agricultural land of Muthukutty Naikkar every day as Pannaiyal. The petitioner had some goats and he used to graze the same in the said land and the income out of the said goats were also given to the above said Muthukutty Naikkar. They are illiterate, socially and economically weaker section and they are depending upon the landlords for their livelihood and
that they have no say against the landlords. The petitioner's elder son is blind and the younger son is also a agricultural cooli attached with Muthukutty Naikkar.
3. While so, on 08.06.2012, at around 7.00 P.M., the petitioner's younger son namely Manikandan aged about 23 years went to the Muthukutty Naikkar's thottam stating that he would get some money from Muthukutty Naikkar to take the petitioner to hospital on the next day, but he did not return for hours together and hence the petitioner went to Muthukutty Naikkar's thottam and enquired with Muthukutty Naikkar, the adjacent land owner Velusamy and his wife Govindammal were also present there, but they did not answer properly. The petitioner searched everywhere but he could not find his son. On the early morning of the next day, he went to bus stand to check whether his son had gone to bus cleaning work in the night at Dharapuram, his son did not come in the first bus also. Again, he along with his wife Veeral and brother Sundarrajan went to Muthukutty Naikkar's land, there he found his son with lot of ousting of blood injury on his head and he went near and realized that his son was dead.
4. By that time, Muthukutty Naikkar, Velusamy, Govindammal and others gathered in that place and told that since Manikandan had seen both Muthukutty Naikkar and Govinthammal in a compromising
position, Muthukutty Naikkar has got angry and beaten him with wooden log and they further told that this is a simple matter happened in a sudden provocation, asked the petitioner not to divulge the matter to anyone including police. The body was immediately taken out of the place and it was cremated on the same day at 9.00 A.M., itself without the consent of the petitioner or his family members by the Muthukutty Naikkar and his close aides. Thereafter, the petitioner and his family members were kept under house arrest for about a week and that he could not contact the Village Administrative Officer and when the petitioner informed to the Village Administrative Officer about the brutal murder a few days lager, he advised him not to take any action against them as he is an ordinary, poor, illiterate man. The Village Administrative Officer also did not take any action. Thereafter, on 15.06.2012, he made a oral complaint with the third respondent, but the third respondent refused to take his complaint.
5. While so, on 09.07.2012, he made a complaint to the District Collector regarding this incident, for which a receipt was also issued by the District Collector, but no action was taken. Again, on 15.07.2012, he made a written complaint to the third respondent. The third respondent instead of registering an F.I.R, gave the petitioner C.S.R. alone.
6. On hearing this incident, the Athi Tamizhar Janagayaga Peravai's Thiruppur district Secretary V.Azhagusubramaniyanb contacted the petitioner and made a complaint with Superintendent of Police on 01.08.2012. In the meantime, the District Collector Officer has received and handed over to the petitioner a sum of Rs.25,000/- from the said Muthukutty Naikkar which is due to the petitioner. The third respondent did not take any action on the complaint dated 15.07.2012. Again, the petitioner's wife made another complaint to the District Collector on 13.08.2012 and thereafter also no action was taken by the third respondent. On the contrary, the petitioner, his brother Sundarrajan and one Subramani were taken to the Superintendent of Police and put under illegal custody for three days in the name of interrogation. However, there was no progress on the complaint given by the petitioner.
7. In the meantime, the petitioner was waylaid by one Prabhu and Muthukutty Naikkar and kicked by the said Prabhu by his leg and was strangulated on his neck by Muthukkutty Naikker through his towel and on seeing this the petitioner's wife rushed there shouting, both of them went away. The petitioner took treatment in the hospital and an F.I.R. was also registered in Crime No.255 of 2012 on the file of the third respondent for the offence under Section 323 and 506(i) IPC.
8. Since the third respondent did not take any action or investigation on the complaint of the petitioner, he filed a private complaint under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate Court at Dharapuram on 03.10.2012. The learned Judicial Magistrate by order dated 05.10.2012 has passed an order observing that "complainant present, records perused, Cognizable offence is made out." Hence, the complaint was forwarded to the Inspector of Police, Kundadam Police Station and he was directed to register FIR immediately, investigate the same and to file final report. Thereafter, FIR was registered in Crime No.262 of 2012 under Section 176 Cr.P.C., on 06.11.2012 by the third respondent.
The third respondent ought to have registered the case for the offence under Section 302 IPC, but willfully and wantonly to conceal and screen the offenders have registered a case strangely under Section 176 Cr.P.C., it would show the bias attitude of the third respondent. The third respondent purposefully to stall the investigation has registered the case under Section 176 Cr.P.C. Hence, his complaint will not be investigated by the third respondent in a fair and proper manner and the culprits could not be punished.
9. Since the petitioner belongs to the weaker community in the society the respondents 2 and 3 are doing injustice to him, though his son was brutally murdered by the landlord for no reason. The said
Muthukutty Naikker and others not only murdered his son they also destroyed evidence of commission of crime by cremating his son's body within two hours of finding the body. They cleverly cremated his son's body in order to avoid any postmortem. Therefore, if the investigation is handled by the third respondent under the supervision of the second respondent, justice will not be rendered and the culprits could not get the punishment. Hence, he prays that the investigation in respect of Crime No.262 of 2012 on the file of the third respondent should be transferred to C.B.C.I.D. Police for unbiased investigation.
10. Learned Government Advocate Mr.Ramesh Babu appeared on behalf of the respondent and filed the status report in compliance of the order passed by this court.
11. In the status report filed by the Inspector of Police, Kundadam Police Station, Tiruppur District, it is submitted that Nachimuthu preferred a petition dated 9.7.2012 against 7 persons namely 1. Muthukutti Naikker, 2. Velusamy Gounder, 3. Govindammal, 4. Prabu, 5. Chettiar Raj, 6. Dindugal Palani and 7.Dindugal Kamatchi Palani, to the District Collector, Tiruppur alleging that his son by name Manikandan aged about 23 went to work on 8.6.2012 and was found dead at about 12 midnight and it is also
alleged that the above said persons have committed murder of his son and sought legal action and a petition with the same contents was also forwarded to the Chief Minister's Special Cell seeking appropriate action. The above said petitions were forwarded to the Superintendent of Police, Tiruppur and the Deputy Superintendent of Police was directed to initiate enquiry upon the issue.
12. Mr.Rajaraman, the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tiruppur South Division, enquired the matter and in the conclusion he has concluded that the deceased Manikandan had died due to extreme drunkenness and that Nachimuthu, father of the deceased Manikandan has cremated the body of his son Manikandan and the expenses for cremation was done by Muthukutti Naikkar only on the compassionate ground considering that Nachimuthu and his son deceased Manikandan were his workers. Before one month from the date of death of the deceased Manikandan, Nachimuthu sold his goats and entrusted Rs.8,500/- to Muthukutti and after the death of Manikandan, Nachimuthu claimed the said sum of Rs.8,500/- from Muthukutti Naikkar, but he refused to return the amount stating that he has spent Rs.22,000/- for the cremation of the deceased Manikandan and that he will return the said amount after some time and due to the misunderstanding which arose in the above said issue,
the said Nachimuthu has preferred such a petition against Muthukutti and others out of such vengeance and have closed the petition recommending that "No further action can be taken in the above said petition."
13. It is seen from the status report that the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, Rajaraman had examined Nachimuthu (father of the deceased Manikandan), who is none other than the petitioner, Sundarraj (Brother of Nachimuthu), Rajasekar (Brother's son of Nachimuthu), and also examined the respondents 1 to 7 and recorded their statements. During the course of enquiry the witnesses had corroborated that though the complainant had cremated the body, subsequently due to money dispute, he has falsely implicated Muthukutty Naikkar and requested the respondent to take action against the said Muthukutty Naicker and confirmed the conclusion arrived at by the Enquiry Officer on 21.07.2012 and that the enquiry upon the petition preferred by the petitioner did not attract any cognizable offence. It is seen that the petitioner had given a statement stating that he had falsely implicated Muthukutty Naikkar due to money dispute and that further action may be dropped.
14. Based on the statement of the petitioner and taking into consideration the postmortem report and the fact that the son of
the petitioner is a drunkard and he had fallen down due to drunkenness and sustained injuries and thereafter he succumbed to the injuries, the petition had been closed and the final report was made ready by the Deputy Superintendent of Police. However, due to the pendency of this petition the final report has not been filed in the Court.
15. In view of the fact that the investigation has been completed and final report has been made ready by the Deputy Superintendent of Police on instructions by the second respondent, the present Criminal Original Petition stands closed. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the final report, he can pursue the remedy by filing appropriate petition before the concerned Magistrate Court by examining the witnesses.
31.08.2017 Gr.
To
1. The Addl. Director General of Police, Crime Branch CID, SIDCO Electronics Complex, Block No.3, 1st Floor, Guindy Industrial Estate, Chennai-600 032.
2. The Superintendent of Police, Thiruppur District, Thiruppur.
3. The Inspector of Police, Kundadam Police Station, Kundadam, Tharapuram Taluk, Thiruppur District. A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J Gr.
Crl.O.P.No.30433 of 2012 31.08.2017