Naga Durga v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR Naga Durga ..Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police Chennai District, Chennai

2. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch -1, Chennai City.

(Crime No.18/2024)

3. Deepa.R

4. Devi.G ..Respondents To transfer the invetigation of Crime No.18 of 20224 dated 14.02.2024 (on the file of the 2nd respondent) to some other competent authority under the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent to CBCID. For Petitioner :

Mr.T.Balaji For Respondents :

Mr.A. Amarnath, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for R1, R2

ORDER

The petitioner lodged a complaint which was registered in Crime No.18 of 2024 for offences under Sections 406, 420, 120B of IPC read with Section

76(1) of Chit Funds Act against four persons namely, Sasikala, Geetha, Deepa and Devi. As there was no progress in the investigation, the petitioner has moved this petition seeking transfer.

2. It is seen that A3 and A4, namely, Deepa and Devi, who are the third and fourth respondents herein had approached this court in Crl.O.P.No.22162 of 2024 seeking anticipatory bail and this Court by order dated 12.09.2024 granted anticipatory bail and one of the conditions was that the petitioners therein to deposit 20 lakhs within a period of three weeks and also the accused to appear before the execution every Monday at 10.30 am and also made it clear that in the event of non compliance of any of the conditions, the trial court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners as per the judgment of the Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala 2005 AIR SCW 5560.

3. The petitioner herein had moved a cancellation of anticipatory bail petition before this court in M.P.No.4588 of 2026 and this court by order dated 11.03.2026 had recorded that the question of cancellation of bail would arose only after the accused were enlarged on anticipatory bail. In the present case, the accused have not complied with the conditions and not availed the benefit of anticipatory bail. It has been recorded that the said, Deepa and Devi have not violated any of the conditions imposed by this Court except for not making payment.

4. The learned counsel submits that this is an error on the case and for which, he would make a representation to get it clarified before the concerned court. In any event, the final report is of the year 2025. The Government Advocate (Criminal Side) on instructions from the respondent Police submits that within a period of three months they would file a charge sheet in this case.

5. In view of the above, the second respondent is directed to take up the investigation in Crime No.18 of 2024, complete the same and file a final report within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. 03-06-2026 nl Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order To

1. The Superintendent of Police Chennai District.Chennai

2. The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch -1, Chennai City.

3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

nl 03-06-2026