Rajesh Kumar v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL W.P(MD) No.10820 of 2025 Rajesh Kumar ... Petitioner vs.

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

2.The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch, Tirunelveli.

3.S.Dhanushkodi ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 2nd respondent to take action on the petitioner's complaint, dated 20.09.2024 and register the same, investigate and file Final Report in accordance with law within a time stipulated by this Court.

For petitioner :Mr.V.Sasi Kumar For R1 & R2 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) Page No. 1 of 5

For R3 : Mr.Ganesh Prabu *****

O R D E R

This petition is filed by the petitioner to direct the second respondent to take action on the petitioner's complaint, dated 20.09.2024.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner lodged a complaint against the third respondent before the second respondent, but no action was taken. Therefore, he filed this petition.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that the petitioner sent a representation to the first respondent/The Superintendent of Police and the same was forwarded to Valliyur Police Station and the Valliyur Police assigned C.S.R.No.286 of 2025 on 19.04.2025 and thereafter, enquired the matter and closed. Hence, nothing survives for further adjudication in this case.

4. Mr.Ganesh Prabu, learned counsel takes notice for the third respondent.

Page No. 2 of 5

5. The learned counsel for the third respondent would submit that the third respondent already appeared before the Valliyur Police and thereafter, they closed the complaint. Now the petitioner only to harass the third respondent, filed this petition.

6. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner by way of reply would submit that the petitioner sent a representation to the second respondent also and the same was not considered.

7. In view of the same, recording the abovesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court directs the second respondent to conduct enquiry on the complaint of the petitioner, after affording opportunity both the parties and dispose of the same within a period of fifteen days from the date of this order in accordance with law.

8. With the abovesaid observations and directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

21.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd Page No. 3 of 5

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

2.The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch, Tirunelveli.

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

Page No. 4 of 5

P.DHANABAL,J apd W.P.(MD) No.10820 of 2025 21.04.2025 Page No. 5 of 5