S.K.Saravanan v. The Inspector General Of Registration
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN S.K.Saravanan
...Petitioner
-Vs1. The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai - 600 028.
2. The District Registrar, Salem, Salem District.
3. The Sub-Registrar, Thalaivasal,
4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Salem, Salem District.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Salem, Salem District.
6. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Attur, Salem District.
7. The Inspector of Police, Thalaivasal Police Station,
8. K.Kumaravel Pandian Inspector of Police, Pennagaram Police Station, Dharmapauri District.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 4 to 6 to take action against the 8th respondent for creating bogus non-traceable certificate dated 18.12.2019 to fraudulently execute the settlement deed in D.No.2934/2019 dated 23.12.2019, based on the proceedings of the respondents 2 & 3 in Na.Ka.No.126/2024 dated 22.05.2024 and the enquiry dated 01.06.2024 conducted by the sixth respondent and based on the representations of the petitioner dated 19.02.2024, 28.02.2024, 27.03.2024, 08.04.2024, 28.05.2024.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Elangovan For Respondents For R1 to R3 : Mr.P.Balathandayutham Special Government Pleader For R4 to R7 : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for directing directing the respondents 4 to 6 to take appropriate action as against eighth respondent for creating bogus non-traceable certificate dated 18.12.2019.
2.
The case of the petitioner is that after obtaining the nontraceable certificate on the ground that the original parent documents were misplaced, his father executed the settlement deed in favour of his own daughters viz., other sisters of the petitioner in respect of the subject property. Further, the petitioner is having share in the subject property and as such, he lodged complaint alleging that the non-traceable certificate was bogusly fabricated by his father with the help of the eighth respondent, as such the petitioner wants to take appropriate action as against the eighth respondent alone.
3.
Even according to the petitioner, the fabricated nontraceable certificate was produced by his father while executing the settlement deed in favour of his own daughters. The eighth respondent being the Inspector of Police issued non-traceable certificate since the original parent documents were misplaced. Therefore, the eighth respondent did not fabricate any bogus certificate. That apart, on the complaint lodged by the petitioner, the sixth respondent conducted detailed enquiry and found that after investigation, the certificate was issued by the Inspector of Police. Therefore, the prayer sought for in this
petition cannot be granted and the writ petition itself devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed.
4.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
17.02.2024 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order rts To
1. The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai - 600 028.
2. The District Registrar, Salem, Salem District.
3. The Sub-Registrar, Thalaivasal,
4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Salem, Salem District.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Salem, Salem District.
6. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Attur, Salem District.
7. The Inspector of Police, Thalaivasal Police Station,
8. The Inspector of Police, Pennagaram Police Station, Dharmapauri District.
9. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J, rts 17.02.2025