Jerome Benedict Rose v. The Director General Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.06.2015 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.P (MD) No.7755 of 2015 Jeorme Benedict Rose

...Petitioner

Vs 1.The Director General of Police, Law and Order Tamilnadu, Chennai.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, at Nagercoil.

3.Mr.Periasamy S/o.Not Known Inspector of Police, Vadasery Police Station, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action as against the third respondent on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 11.04.2015.

For petitioner ...

Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar For R1 and R2 ...

Mr.S.Kumar Addl. Govt. Pleader

O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first and second respondents.

2.This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action as against the third respondent on the basis of the petitioner's representation, dated 11.04.2015.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.It is the case of the petitioner that despite the offence having been committed against him, the third respondent for the reasons best known to him, has not registered a case. Thereafter, the petitioner obtained a direction under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C from the Jurisdictional Magistrate. Even thereafter, no action has been taken by the first and the second respondents. Though the petitioner brought the same to the knowledge of the third respondent about his car used by the accused people, third respondent failed to take further action in this matter. Even thereafter, the petitioner made a phone call to Police Control Room. Though the car was intercepted and seized, it was once again given to the accused person by the first and the second respondents.

Accordingly, alleged dereliction of duty has caused huge loss to the petitioner and therefore, he made a representation, dated 11.04.2015 to the first and the second respondents. Inspite of the said representation, no action has been taken against the third respondent. Hence, the petitioner filed the present petition before this Court. 4.Taking note of the pendency of the representation, dated 11.04.2015 and without going into the merits of the case, this Court directs the second respondent to look into the same and to pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(RTI) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Ns To 1.The Director General of Police, Law and Order, Tamilnadu, Chennai.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil.

3.The Inspector of Police, Vadasery Police Station, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

+1cc to Mr.K.P.NARAYANAKUMAR,ADVOCATE IN SR NO.26979 W. P(MD) No.7755 of 2015 02.06.2015 RG.09.06.2015 2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/