Nagarajan P v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL P.Nagarajan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent of Police, Karur District, Karur..

2. The Inspector of Police, Karur Town Police Station, Karur District.

3. Ramkumar

4. Suriya

5. Panneer ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action against the respondents 3 and 4 by conducting an enquiry based on the petitioner's representation dated 29.12.2024. Page No. 1 of 4

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Mathiyalagan For R1 to R2 : 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 and 2 to take appropriate action against the respondents no.3 and 4 by conducting an enquiry based on the petitioner's representation dated 29.12.2024.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that there is a tenancy dispute pending between the petitioner and the private respondents no.3 to 5 and thereby, the private respondents trespassed into the petitioner's premises by break open the door and stolen entire records. Therefore, he lodged a complaint on 29.12.2024 and the 2nd respondent has also issued a C.S.R.No.36 of 2025 dated 08.01.2025 and thereafter, no action was taken. Hence this petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents no.1 and 2 would submit that the complaint of the Page No. 2 of 4

petitioner was already considered and closed as withdrawn after enquiry on 08.01.2025. Therefore, nothing survives for further adjudication in this case.

4. Considering the prayer sought for in the petition, this Court without even issuing notice to the private respondents no.3 to 5 inclined to pass order in this case.

5. According to the petitioner, he lodged a complaint against the private respondents no.3 to 5 but the same has not been considered. According to the 2nd respondent, already they have conducted an enquiry and closed as withdrawn on 08.01.2025. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with for the closure of the complaint. In view of the same, petitioner is at liberty to challenge the closure of the complaint in the manner known to law and this writ petition is closed. No costs.

25.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No Mac Page No. 3 of 4

P.DHANABAL, J.

Mac To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Karur District, Karur.

2. The Inspector of Police, Karur Town Police Station, Karur District.

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

25.03.2025 Page No. 4 of 4