M.Sudha v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.01.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR M.Sudha ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai.

2. R.Manikandan

3. Suganya

4. Solairaj ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider petitioner's representation dated 20.09.2024 and take necessary appropriation action against the respondents 2 to 4. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Mathava Selvam For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar (R1) Additional Public Prosecutor 1/5

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 1st respondent to consider petitioner's representation dated 20.09.2024 and take necessary appropriation action against the respondents 2 to 4..

2. The contention of the petitioner is that 2nd respondent has borrowed a sum of Rs.27,40,000/- from the petitioner on two occasions and the respondents 2 to 4 promised to return the same within a period of six months. Believing his words, the petitioner has also gave the amount to the 2nd respondent. However, the 2nd respondent failed to return the same. Though the same was asked by the petitioner in person, the respondents failed to return the same. Hence, the petitioner has given a complain before the first respondent. On enquiry, the respondents 2 to 4 agreed to return the amount within a period of six months. On 05.08.2024, the respondents have returned a sum of Rs.5 lakhs to the petitioner and threatened her not to ask the remaining amount and threatened her with dire consequences. Hence, the petitioner has given a representation to the respondents on 20.09.2024 and the same was not acted upon.

2/5

3.This Court has not expressed any of its view with regard to the merits of the representation made by the petitioner. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made, the respondents are duty bound to consider the same in one way or the other. Non-consideration of the same would amount to dereliction of ordinary duties of their office and as such, this Court would be justified in invoking its powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct them to consider the petitioner's representation within a stipulated time.

4. In view of the limited prayer sought for by the petitioner in the petition without going into the merits of the case there shall be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 20.09.2024 and pass orders on its merits in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

3/5

5.With the above direction the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

03.01.2025 NCC: Yes/No Index: Yes/No Internet : Yes/No PNM To

1. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai.

2. The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai.

4/5

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

PNM ORDER IN 03.01.2025 5/5