A.M.Dhakshanamoorthy v. Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :09.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.R.C. No.1986 of 2025 A.M. Dhakshanamoorthy ...petitioner Vs

1. Superintendent of Police, Cuddlore District.

2. State Rep by its SHO Panruti Police Station, Cuddalore District ..Respondent Prayer: This Criminal Revision is filed under Section 438 r/w 440 of BNSS 2023 to call for the records and set aside the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Panruti in Crl.M.P.No.2703 of 2024 dated 28.08.2025 and subsequently direct the respondents to register a F.I.R by conducting fair enquiry on the petitioner's complaint dated 20.02.2024 in accordance with law and pass orders.

For Petitioner : Mr.J. Rajan For Respondent : Dr.C.E. Pratap, Government Advocate 1/5

O R D E R

This criminal revision has been filed to call for the records and set aside the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Panruti in Crl.M.P.No.2703 of 2024 dated 28.08.2025 and subsequently direct the respondents to register a F.I.R by conducting fair enquiry on the petitioner's complaint dated 20.02.2024 in accordance with law and pass orders 2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has filed a petition under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C seeking a direction to the Station House Officer, Panruti to register a case and file a report based on the allegations contained in the petition. Pursuant to which SHO, Panruti has filed a detailed report stating that upon proper enquiry, no cognizable offence is made out against the persons named as accused in the petition. Based upon the same the learned Judge has dismissed the petition in Crl.M.P.No.2703 of 2024 on 28.08.2025. Challenging, the same the petitioner has come up with this petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the enquiry 2/5

conducted by the second respondent was not proper and was carried out in a mechanical manner. He further submitted that the second respondent acted in collusion with the accused and deliberately failed to consider the evidence and witnesses submitted by the petitioner. Hence, prays to allow this petition.

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

5. On a perusal of the impugned order it reveals that that the Court below had directed the concerned SHO to conduct a preliminary enquiry on the facts mentioned in the petition. In compliance with the said direction, the SHO has conducted a due enquiry and submitted a detailed report stating that no cognizable offence has been disclosed. After going through the SHO's report and the available records, the petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed concluding that there is no prima facie material to conclude that the alleged persons have committed any cognizable offence.

6. In view of the above it is made clear that the order passed by the 3/5

learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Panruti in Crl.M.P.No.2703 of 2024 on 28.08.2025 is perfectly valid as there is no prima facie material available against the proposed accused and does not require interference. Hence, this petition deserves to be dismissed and the same is dismissed. Index : Yes/No 09.10.2025 Internet : Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking Order smn To.

1. The Superintendent of Police, Cuddlore District.

2. The SHO, Panruti Police Station, Cuddalore District.

3. The Judicial Magistrate-I, Panruti 4/5

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

Smn Crl.R.C. No.1986 of 2025 09.10.2025 5/5