← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/11973/2025closed

Arunchander v. The Commissioner Of Police

2025-04-25Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL W.P(MD) No.11973 of 2025 Arunchander ... Petitioner vs.

1. The Commissioner of Police O/o. the Commissioner.

Madurai.

2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police O/o. the Assistant Commissioner of Police Anaiyur, Madurai.

3.The Inspector of Police, Koodalpudur Police Station, Madurai District.

4.Gunasekaran 5.Devi Mariammal ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to conduct fair enquiry upon the petitioner's complaint conducted investigation its report in C.S.R.No.72/2025 on the file of the third respondent based on Page No. 1 of 5

the petitioner's representation/aggrieved complaint, dated 24.03.2025. For petitioner :Mr.Kannan Gurusami For R1 to R3 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) *****

O R D E R

This petition is filed by the petitioner to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to conduct fair enquiry upon the petitioner's complaint in C.S.R.No. 72 of 2025 on the file of the third respondent based on the petitioner's representation dated 24.03.2025.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner lodged a complaint against the respondents 4 and 5 before the third respondent on 24.03.2025 and the same was assigned in C.S.R.No. 72 of 2025. Thereafter, no action was taken. Therefore, he filed this petition.

4. Considering the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court, without issuing notice to the respondents 4 and 5, is inclined to pass Page No. 2 of 5

orders.

5. According to the petitioner, he lodged a complaint before the third respondent against the respondents 4 and 5, but no action was taken. The third respondent also admitted the receipt of the complaint and thereby, they assigned C.S.R.No.72 of 2025 and the same was enquired and closed as money dispute.

6. Considering the prayer sought for in this petition, and the representation of the petitioner was already considered and closed by the third respondent, nothing survives for further adjudication in this case. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the closure of the complaint in the manner known to law, if he is aggrieved.

7. In view of the same, preserving the liberty of the petitioner to challenge the closure report in the manner known to law, this Writ Petition is closed. No costs.

25.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd Page No. 3 of 5

To

1. The Commissioner of Police O/o. the Commissioner.

Madurai.

2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police O/o. the Assistant Commissioner of Police Anaiyur, Madurai.

3.The Inspector of Police, Koodalpudur Police Station, Madurai District.

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

Page No. 4 of 5

P.DHANABAL,J apd W.P.(MD) No.11973 of 2025 25.04.2025 Page No. 5 of 5