Pratheesh v. The Commissioner Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.04.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR Crl.O.P.(MD)No.5244 of 2018 Pratheesh : Petitioner Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Police, Trichy City.

2.The Inspector of Police, Ponmalai Police Station, Trichy.

: Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to direct the second respondent to register the complaint given by the petitioner, dated 22.02.2018 to conduct the fair and proper investigation. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar For Respondents : Mr.K.K.Ramakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This petition has been filed to direct the second respondent to register the complaint given by the petitioner, dated 22.02.2018 to conduct the fair and proper investigation.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the materials placed on record.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner and one Suganya were working in the Kotak Mahindra Bank, Trichy, the petitioner had acquaintance with the said Suganya. Thereafter, the said Suganya lodged a complaint against the petitioner and her relatives threatened the petitioner to marry her, since she got pregnant. Due to the above said pressure, the petitioner was forced to marry the said Suganya. After the marriage, the petitioner came to know that she was not pregnant at all and with a view to get marriage, she lodged a false complaint against the petitioner. Thereafter, she has close relationship with male friends. When the petitioner questioned and restricted her, she made life threat to the

petitioner through her friends. Therefore, he made a complaint to the first respondent police on 22.02.2018 and subsequently, the same was forwarded to the second respondent to taking immediate action. He further submitted that the petitioner also appeared for enquiry and produced all relevant documents to strengthen the allegations made in the complaint dated 22.02.2018. As there was no case registered on the said complaint, the petitioner has come up with this petition.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State submitted that the relationship between the petitioner and the said Suganya is husband and wife and therefore, the remedy is available before the appropriate forum. Further, the petitioner has not appeared for enquiry. Hence, the respondent has not proceed with further enquiry in the above said complaint.

5. In view of the above said statement, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will co-operate for enquiry and he will appear for enquiry on any date fixed by this Court.

6. In view of the above submission, the second respondent is directed to expedite the enquiry and complete the same as expeditiously as possible. During the course of enquiry, if any cognizable offence is made out, the second respondent police shall take action in accordance with law. In case of closure of the complaint, a copy of the closure report be furnished to the petitioner within a week of such closure. On receipt of the same, it is open to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law.

7. With the above direction, the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The Commissioner of Police, Trichy City.

2. The Inspector of Police, Ponmalai Police Station, Trichy.

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

+5cc to T.Senthil Kumar, Advocate Sr.No.59904 PJL VB/SV/MMS/SAR2/17.04.2018/3P/9C Crl.O.P.(MD)No.5244 of 2018 05.04.2018