← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9568/2022dismissed

Nageswaran v. The District Collector

2022-05-19Honourable Mrs Justice T.V.Thamilselvi2 pages

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.9568 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date : 19.05.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.O.P.(MD)No.9568 of 2022 Nageswaran ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by the District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Srivilliputhur Range, Srivilliputhru, Virudhunagar District.

4.The Inspector of Police, Watrap Police Station, Watrap, Virudhunagar District.

...Respondents

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the 2nd respondent police to preserve the CCTV footage of 4th respondent police on 14.05.2022 between 09.00 am to 12.00 am with regard to the complaint of the petitioner dated 14.05.2022.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan For Respondents : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This petition has been filed to direct the second respondent police to preserve the CCTV footage of fourth respondent police on 14.05.2022 between 09.00 am to 12.00 am with regard to the complaint of the petitioner dated 14.05.2022.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is a dispute between the petitioner and one Muthupandi. An unknown person by name Renugadevi claiming that she is the wife of Muthupandi introduced herself as an Advocate demanded the petitioner to transfer the amount and threatened that if it is not transferred, she would foist a number of cases against the petitioner. While being so, said Renugadevi was admitted in Watrap Government Hospital and a case in Crime No.26 of 2022 was registered against the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.9568 of 2022 petitioner and his family members. Even thereafter, the said Renugadevi is threatening the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner went to the fourth respondent police station on 14.05.2022 at around 10.00 am to lodge a complaint, wherein the petitioner was given life threat by Renugadevi. Hence, the petitioner filed this petition seeking a direction to preserve the station premises CCTV footage. 3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the complaint given by the petitioner was enquired into and closed. So, there is no necessity to preserve the CCTV footage and prayed for dismissal of this petition.

4.Since the petitioner's complaint was enquired into and closed, the relief sought for in this petition has become infructuous and it will not need for any purpose. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Vacation Officer) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To:- 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Srivilliputhur Range, Srivilliputhru, Virudhunagar District. 4.The Inspector of Police, Watrap Police Station, Watrap, Virudhunagar District. 5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1 cc to Mr.P.M.VISHNUVARTHANAN, Advocate, SR.No.4807 (I) Crl.O.P.(MD)No.9568 of 2022 Date:19.05.2022 SA(01.06.2022) 2P 7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2