Palanichamy.S v. The Superintendent Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.06.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM S.Palanichamy ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Srivilliputtur Town Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
4.A.Namasivayam ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent herein to dispose the complaint dated 04.05.2022 in accordance with law.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jothi Basu For R-1, R-2 and R-3 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for Mandamus to direct the third respondent herein to dispose the complaint, dated 04.05.2022.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, his father and mother are the owners of the property in Survey Nos.1654, 1550, 1553. After borrowing one lakh rupees as hand loan from the fourth respondent, he executed a sale deed in favour of the fourth respondent wife namely, Jaya @ Umaya. The 1/3
document is only a sham and nominal on the guise of the sale deed in favour of the fourth respondent wife. They are giving trouble and hence, the petitioner has given a complaint to the third respondent. The complaint is not further investigated and it is still kept pending on the file of the third respondent. Aggrieved over this, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
3. The learned Government Advocate submitted that the respondent Police have investigated the case. The fourth respondent wife is the purchaser of the property. The petitioner has sold the property to the fourth respondent wife namely, Jaya @ Umaya. The fourth respondent also gave a statement before the Police and the investigation is yet to be completed within four (4) weeks.
4. I have considered the matter in the light of the submission made by the learned counsel for both the parties. Admittedly, there is a complaint pending before the third respondent. In pursuance of the complaint given by the petitioner with regard to property dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent, the fourth respondent has also given a statement before the Police and the Government Advocate assured that the investigation will be completed within four weeks. By accepting the submission of the learned Government Advocate, four weeks time has been granted for completing the investigation.
5. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS III) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Nsr 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.
2/3
To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Srivilliputtur Town Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1 CC to M/s.M.JOTHI BASU, Advocate ( SR-25008[F] dated 10/06/2022 ) 09.06.2022 SS(14/06/2022) 3P 6C 3/3