Madras High CourtWP(MD)/5945/2025disposed of

Mohammed Kani v. The Superintendent Of Police

2025-03-06Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.03.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Mohammed Kani ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Pudhukottai District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Thirumayam Police Station, Pudhukottai District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to take action on the petitioners complaint dated 05.11.2024 in light of the dictum laid by the Honble Apex Court in Lalitha Kumari Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh as reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Samuel Gunasingh For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor 1/4

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to take action on the petitioner's complaint dated 05.11.2024 in light of the dictum laid by the Apex Court in Lalitha Kumari Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh as reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1. 2.According to the petitioner, he invested money in Trichy Agro Farms on monthly installment for 60 months i.e. From 16.09.2017 to 06.10.2022, through one Sebastein and receipt has been issued for the said payment. After full payment, now the amount was not repaid. Hence the petitioner lodged the present complaint, for which, C.S.R.No. 647 of 2022 has been issued, but no action was taken. Hence this petition.

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioner lodged the complaint as against the said Sebastein, who is a middle man, but the owner of the Company is absconding and thereby, the petitioner himself agreed to go 2/4

before the concerned Court for seeking remedy. Therefore, the petitioner's complaint was closed on 25.11.2024. Therefore, nothing survives for further adjudication in this case. 4.Since the petitioner has lodged the complaint against the middle man and the same was already closed, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to lodge a fresh complaint as against the owner of the Company in accordance with law.

06.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Pudhukottai District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Thirumayam Police Station, Pudhukottai District.

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

3/4

P.DHANABAL , J.

LR 06.03.2025 4/4