Dr. E. Marimuthu v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.01.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH Crl.O.P.No.30007 of 2015 Dr.E.Marimuthu ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

2. The Inspector of Police, Cheiyyar Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

... Respondents Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking direction to the first respondent to appoint efficient police officer as per Rule 7 of SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act and pay compensation to the petitioner under the Annexure/Schedule of the said Act.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Velmurugan For Respondents : Mr.C.Emalias Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

The present criminal original petition has been filed to direct the first respondent to appoint efficient police officer as per Rule 7 of SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act and pay compensation to the petitioner under the Annexure/Schedule of the said Act.

2. The petitioner is hailing from S.C. Community and he is a lecturer and Head of the Department in Aringnar Anna Arts College, Cheyyar, Thiruvannamalai District. One Dhananchezhiyan, Junior Lecturer who is working under the petitioner belonged to Hindu caste and he is not co-operating with the petitioner and he misbehaved with a lady lecturer for flimsy reason. This was questioned by the petitioner. Hence the accused along with another lecturer circulated bit notice against this petitioner and the same was witnessed by other office staff. He also made life threat to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Hence the petitioner lodged a complaint against the accused. On basis of the complaint of the petitioner, a case has been registered in Crime No.443 of 2015 under sections 292, 506(i) read with 3(1)(r) SC.ST Amendment and Ordinance Act, 2014. Thereafter, the case was not investigated under the rule 7 of SC/ST Act. Hence the petitioner has come forward with the present criminal original petition to transfer the investigation.

3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

4. When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that almost the investigation has been completed and after the receipt of community certificate from the authorities, charge sheet will be filed before the concerned Magistrate Court.

5. In view of the submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, there is no need to give any direction to the respondents and the petition is dismissed. However, the second respondent is directed to file the final report as early as possible.

vrc s/d- Assistant Registrar(CCC) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

2. The Inspector of Police, Cheiyyar Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

+ 1 cc to Mr.K.Velayutharaja, Advocate SR 5525 nm(co) prk11/2 Crl.O.P.No.30007 of 2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/