Madras High CourtCRL RC/1850/2023dismissed

M.P.Vasanthraj v. State By

2024-07-15Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 15.07.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI M.P.Vasanthraj ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Represented by The Inspector of Police (L & O), H3, Tondiarpet Police Station, Chennai-81.

... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 (1) r/w. 401 of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to call for the records in Crl.M.P.No.2897 of 2023 dated 12.04.2023 on the file of the learned XV Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras and set aside the same and direct the respondent to register FIR.

For Petitioner :

Mr.R.C.Manoharan For Respondent :

Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.side)

O R D E R

The Criminal Revision Case is filed to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.2897 of 2023 dated 12.04.2023 by the learned XV Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras.

2. The case of the petitioner is that there was a civil dispute between him and one Madhanraj, which culminated in registering the First Information Report. Madhanraj induced the employees of the Corporation of Chennai to threaten the petitioner by demanding Corporation Tax Arrears, though he is not having any property within Zone V of Corporation of Chennai, based on which, One Parthasarathy and Senthil, who are the Tax Collector and the Zone V Chairman of the Corporation of Chennai, instructed Venkatesan, who is the Tax Collector, to call the petitioner over phone and threaten him and thereby, he contacted the petitioner and threatened him as if the petitioner has not paid the Corporation Tax Arrears, and demanded money as bribe and used abusive words against the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has made a complaint before the respondent Police and CSR was also issued, however, the respondent Police has not registered the

FIR against them, therefore, the petitioner has filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.2897 of 2023 before the learned XV Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras and it was dismissed vide impugned order dated 12.04.2023. Challenging the same, the present petition has been filed.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that if the respondent Police furnishes the details of Parthasarathy, Venkatesan and Senthil to the petitioner, he will work out his remedy in the manner known to law.

4. In reply to the same, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent Police submits that in respect of furnishing the details of the aforementioned persons, the petitioner has to file an application under the Right to Information Act before the Police and if such application is filed, the Police will consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

5. In view of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent Police, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file an application under the Right to Information Act before the respondent Police for obtaining the details of the aforementioned persons and if such application is filed by the petitioner, the respondent Police is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. 15.07.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No ssb To The learned XV Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras. M.DHANDAPANI, J.

ssb 15.07.2024