Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/16402/2016disposed of

M.Santhakumari, v. The Superintendent Of Police,

2016-09-02Honourable Dr. Justice S. Vimala2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.09.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE S.VIMALA Crl.O.P.(MD).No.16402 of 2016 M.Santhakumari .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Dindigul Town North Police Station, Dindigul District.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the Respondent No.2 to register the case on the petitioner's complaint dated 10.08.2016 and proceed with the same as per law within the time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For Respondents : Mr.A.P.Balasubramani Government Advocate(Criminal side) For Intervenor : S.Panivelayutham

ORDER

It is an application seeking a direction to the second respondent to register a case based on the petitioner's complaint dated 10.08.2016.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondents. 3.The complaint preferred by the petitioner discloses the offences under Sections 406, 420, 465 and 506(ii) IPC. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondents would submit that petition enquiry is pending in CSR No.304 of 2016.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5.The proposed party by name Mohan want to file an

intervening application to raise his contentions. 6.It is not the petition, under the stage of enquiry. The case is yet to be registered. Under such circumstances, this Court need not want an intervening petition to be filed. 7.In view of the above, the second respondent is directed to expedite enquiry and while conducting enquiry, the second respondent shall enquire the proposed party Mohan and complete the same within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. During the course of enquiry, if any cognizable offence is made out, the second respondent shall take action in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Lalitha Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P & others [2013 (4) Crimes 243 (SC). 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. 8.With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AE) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar mj To 1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Dindigul Town North Police Station, Dindigul District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1 cc to Mr. T.LAJAPATHI ROY,Advocate, Sr.No: 50227 +1 cc to Mr.S.PALANIVELAYUTHAM ,Advocate, Sr.No: 49854 JAM/AAL-MPA/22.09.16/2P-6C Crl.O.P(MD)No.16402 of 2016 02.09.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/