M.Kuppuswamy, M/A. 60 Years, v. Senthil Rajmohan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN M.Kuppusamy ... Petitioner Vs.

Senthil Rajmohan, The Inspector of Police, C1 Police Station, Harur.

Dharmapuri District.

... Respondent Prayer: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondent for his wilful and flagrant violation of the order dated 21.04.2023 in Crl.OP.No.8738 of 2023. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prabakaran For Respondent : Mr.S.Balaji, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner herein gave a complaint to the respondent police on 11.11.2022 stating that the original sale deed dated 14.07.1979 lost and therefore, he may be furnished with non traceable certificate. Since no action taken on his complaint, Crl.OP.No.8738 of 2023 was filed before this Court.

2. Upon hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as 1/4

well as the learned Government Advocate appearing for the police, this Court has disposed of Crl.OP.No.8738 of 2023 with the direction to the petitioner, to produce all the necessary documents before the respondent police and on production of such documents, the respondent police shall consider the complaint and pass appropriate order in the manner known to law.

3. Alleging that the police has not conducted enquiry and issue non traceable certificate, contempt petition filed. Upon notice, the respondent police has filed detailed affidavit which reads as below: "7. I respectfully submit that during the course of enquiry, the respondent police called the petitioner for enquiry sand also instructed him to submit the records related to this property. But, he failed to appear for enquiry and not submitted the records.

8. In respectfully submit that during the course of enquiry, the respondent police obtained a report from the Village Administrative Officer, Keelanoor Village, Harur in which he stated that the UDR Patta shows that the property situated in S.Nos.57/4 and 59/3 does not reflect the names of petitioner. Instead, the survey number has been sub divided into several parts, several pattas are issued in the name of respective owners. The petitioner is not at all owner of the 2/4

property.

9. I respectfully submit that after conducted enquiry, it reveals that there is no prima facie or sufficient reasons has not made out, hence the petitioner is not entitled to have the Non-Traceable Certificate.

10. I respectfully submit that the respondent police conducted the enquiry of this case in a fair, free and impartial manner in accordance with law. After conducted enquiry, the respondent police came to conclusion that there is no prima facie is made out to issue Non-Traceable Certificate, same has been rejected on 22.11.2024. Further on 18.06.2025, the respondent police sent rejection order to the petitioner through registered post".

4, The affidavit filed by the Inspector of Police, C-1 Harur Police Station, Dharmapuri District with self explanatory. It is clear that the petitioner has not cooperated for the enquiry. Therefore, the petitioner is unable to proceed further. Nothing made out to entertain this contempt petition, Hence, contempt petition stands dismissed. 20.06.2025 Vv Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

3/4

Vv 20.06.2025 4/4