Madras High CourtWP(MD)/1541/2025disposed of

S. Antony Franklin v. The Commissioner Of Police

2025-04-28Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL W.P(MD) No.1541 of 2025 S. Antony Franklin ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City.

2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, City Crime Branch, Tirunelveli City.

3. The Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch, Tirunelveli City.

4. Manikandan ... Respondents (R4 is suo motu impleaded vide order dated 22.01.2025 in W.P.(MD) No.1541 of 2025) PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records pertaining to the report submitted by the second respondent signed by him on 09.12.2024 and quash the same and consequently, direct the first respondent to appoint honest office to conduct an investigation on the petitioner's complaint dated 19.08.2024.

For petitioner :Mr. R.Anand Page No. 1 of 4

For R1 to R3 : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) *****

O R D E R

This petition is filed by the petitioner to quash the report submitted by the second respondent signed by him on 09.12.2024 and consequently, direct the first respondent to appoint honest office to conduct an investigation on the petitioner's complaint dated 19.08.2024.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that due to the money dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent, the petitioner lodged a complaint dated 19.08.2024 before Perumalpuram Police Station, Tirunelveli City and they assigned Crime No.268 of 2024. thereafter, without conducting proper investigation, the second respondent closed the complaint. Hence, he filed this petition.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the complaint of the petitioner was registered in C.S.R. No.264 of 2024 and after conducting elaborate enquiry, the second respondent closed the same. There is no specific allegation as against the second respondent. Hence, this petition is liable Page No. 2 of 4

to be dismissed.

4. Considering the prayer sought for in this petition and the respondents enquired the complaint of the petitioner and closed the same, it is for the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate Court by challenging the closure report in the manner known to law.

5. With the abovesaid observations and directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

28.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To

1. The Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City.

2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, City Crime Branch, Tirunelveli City.

3. The Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch, Tirunelveli City.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Page No. 3 of 4

P.DHANABAL,J apd W.P.(MD) No.1541 of 2025 28.04.2025 Page No. 4 of 4