A.Raji v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.03.2016 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.MALA Crl.O.P.No.5619 of 2016 A.Raji .. Petitioner/Defecto Complainant Vs.

1.State rep. by The Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai Office of the Commissioner of Police Veppery, Chennai.

2.The Deputy Commissioner of Police Triplicane, Chennai.

3.The State rep. by the Inspector of Police G-7 Chetpet police station Chennai.

.. Respondents/Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to direct the third respondent to register a case in C.S.R.No.255/CSR/G7 PS(X)/2015 on 08.08.2015 issued by the third respondent.

For Petitioner :Mr.L.C.M.Lazuras For Respondent :Mr.C.Emalias Addl. Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for a direction to the third respondent to register a case pertaining to the petitioner's complaint dated 08.08.2015 in CSR.No.255 of 2015 on the file of the third respondent. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has lodged a complaint before the first respondent on 15.09.2014 and the same was forwarded to the second and third respondents and after receipt of the same,

C.S.R.No.255/CSR/G7 PS(X)/2015 has been given. But the respondents have not shown any interest to enquire the matter and register the case. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with this petition for the above stated relief. 3.At this juncture, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner, petition enquiry has been conducted and during that enquiry, the counter petitioner undertook to repay the amount in monthly installments and that the complaint was closed. Since the counter petitioner has not repaid the amount, the petitioner has come forward with this petition.

4.Heard both sides and perused the typed set of papers. 5.The averments made in the petition itself shows that for getting job, the amount was paid by way of cheque and the same has been received by the counter petitioner. Merely because the counter petitioner has given an undertaking to repay the amount, the complaint should not have been closed. Hence, the closure report furnished by the respondents is hereby reopened. The third respondent is directed to conduct enquiry and follow the dictum laid down in Lalitha Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P & others [2013 (4) Crimes 243 (SC) and register a case, if any cognizable offence is made out.

6. The Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with the above direction.

-s/d- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai Office of the Commissioner of Police Veppery, Chennai.

2.The Deputy Commissioner of Police Triplicane, Chennai.

3.The State rep. by the Inspector of Police G-7 Chetpet police station Chennai.

4.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Chennai.

+1 cc to Mr.L.C.M.Lazuras Advocate sr.16466 Crl.O.P.No.5619 of 2016 aa17/03/2016