Shamugam @ Shanmugasundaram v. Director General Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.07.2023 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR Shanmugam @ Shanmugasundaram ... Petitioner Vs.

1.Director General of Police, No.1, Kamaraja Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Salem, Salem District.

3.The State Human Rights Commissioner, State Human Rights Commission, Thiruvarangam, 143, P.S.Kumarasamy Raja Salai, (Greenways Road), Chennai - 600 028.

... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to take appropriate action against Sendhilkumar and Venkatesh based on the petitioner's representation dated 01.06.2023. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Thamarai Selvan For Respondents : Mr.S.Rajesh Government Advocate

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to take appropriate action against one Sendhilkumar and Venkatesh based on the petitioner's representation dated 01.06.2023. 2.It is the case of the petitioner that he is running a jewellery shop and a case in Crime No.497 of 2017 came to registered against the petitioner for the offence under Section 392 IPC on the file of Annathanapatti Police Station. At that time, two Police officers, namely Sendhilkumar and Venkatesh, who were working in the said Police Station, demanded money from the petitioner and the petitioner also paid money to them. Subsequently, the petitioner was acquitted from the criminal case by the Sessions Court, Salem.

The grievance of the petitioner is that, even thereafter, the said Police officers Sendhilkumar and Venkatesh are continuing to harass the petitioner by causing threat and demanding money from the petitioner in an unlawful manner. Hence, the petitioner submitted a representation, dated 01.06.2023, to the respondents to take appropriate action against the said Police officials, however, the same has not evoked any response so far.

filed the present writ petition.

3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the entire materials available on record.

4.On a perusal of the very representation given by the petitioner, it is clear that it is an afterthought developed by the petitioner. The petitioner himself has admitted in his representation that he is facing two criminal cases, one involving robbery in Crime No.497 of 2017, in which he was ultimately acquitted, and another in Crime No.293 of 2019 which is still pending. On a reading of the representation, it is clear that the petitioner has mechanically levelled certain baseless allegations against two Police officials, that too, in a unscrupulous manner. Hence, I do not find it to be a fit case for issuing a mandamus as sought for by the petitioner. 5.Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. No costs.

25.07.2023 mkn N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

mkn Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Nonspeaking order To 1.The Director General of Police, No.1, Kamaraja Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Salem, Salem District.

3.The State Human Rights Commissioner, State Human Rights Commission, Thiruvarangam, 143, P.S.Kumarasamy Raja Salai, (Greenways Road), Chennai - 600 028.

25.07.2023