Nagaraj v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 05.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL W.P(MD)No.5898 of 2025 Nagaraj ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tirumangalam Sub Division, Tirumangalam, Madurai District.
3. The Inspector of Police, Koodakovil Police Station, Madurai District.
4. Raghu
5. Ranjith
6. Ajith
7. Alagar
8. Arunkumar
9. Murali ... Respondents Page No. 1 of 4
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, the respondents 1 to 3 herein to conduct and complete the enquiry in a speedy manner on the petitioner's complaint in C.S.R.No.19/2025 dated 17.01.2025 and to take necessary action against the respondents no.4 to 9 and other accused persons in accordance with law within the time stipulated fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr. G.Sarathkumar For Respondents :
For R-1 to R-3 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side)
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the respondents no.1 to 3 to conduct and complete the enquiry in C.S.R No.19 of 2025 dated 17.01.2025 as against the respondents no. 4 to 9.
2. According to the petitioner, on 15.01.2025, when he was in his house, the respondents no.4 to 9 along with others trespassed into the house of the petitioner with deadly weapons and asked about his son Pandiselvam and they have also damaged the household articles worth about Rs.30,000/- and taken away a cash amount of Rs.85,000/-. Therefore, he lodged a complaint before the 3rd respondent police and the Page No. 2 of 4
same was assigned C.S.R.No.19 of 2025 dated 17.01.2025. Thereafter, they have not taken any steps and thereby, he sent a representation to the 1st respondent and the same has not been considered. Hence, he has filed this petition.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents no. 1 to 3 would submit that they have received the complaint from the petitioner. Thereafter, they assigned C.S.R.No.19 of 2025 and conducted an enquiry and the same was closed as false. Therefore, nothing survives for further adjudication.
4. Since the prayer of the petitioner is to consider the representation and to take action and the said complaint was already closed after enquiry, it is for the petitioner to challenge the closure report in the manner known to law. In view of the same, preserving the liberty of the petitioner to challenge the closure report in the manner known to law, this writ petition is closed. No costs. 05.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No Mac Page No. 3 of 4
P.DHANABAL , J.
Mac To
1. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tirumangalam Sub Division, Tirumangalam, Madurai District.
3. The Inspector of Police, Koodakovil Police Station, Madurai District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
W.P(MD)No.5898 of 2025 05.03.2025 Page No. 4 of 4