Valliyammal v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI Valliyammal ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi District.

Tenkasi.

2.The Inspector of Police, Uthumalai Police Station, Tenkasi District.

3.Chinnagurusamy 4.Murugan

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to conduct the enquiry, on the basis of petitioner's complaint dated 08.04.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sankar, For R1 & R2 : Mr.A.S. Abul Kalaam Azad, Government Advocate (Crl.side) 1/5

O R D E R

The petitioner with a grievance that her complaint dated 27.01.2024 was not enquired by the respondent Police, has approached this Court, seeking a Mandamus.

2.Today(03.06.2025), when this writ petition is taken up for admission, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondents 1 & 2, on written instructions, submits that the complaint of the petitioner dated 27.01.2024 was enquired by the respondent as petition enquiry in CSR No.86 of 2024. They have conducted an enquiry and during the enquiry, the proposed accused admitted that they have received some money from the petitioner's brother, one Murugan and undertook to return the same within a period of six months. Based on the said undertaking, the respondent police has closed the complaint of this petitioner. The learned Government Advocate has also enclosed a copy of the statement given by one Murugan S/o Mookkaiya Thevar and Valliyammal/the petitioner herein. While so, this petitioner has 2/5

lodged another complaint on the same issue on 08.04.2025 and also filed this writ petition. The learned Government Advocate has also produced the files in CSR No.86 of 2024.

3.This Court considered the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) and also perused the materials placed on record.

4. It appears that this petitioner's brother one Murugan died and his wife also died. They are not having any legal heirs. From the records of the said Murugan, it is seen that the said Murugan is having money transaction with different persons. Therefore, she has lodged a complaint before the respondent police on 27.01.2015 that the opposite parties have cheated the petitioner's brother. The respondent police has also conducted an enquiry, recorded their statements and closed the files. It is purely a money transaction and the respondent police is not having any role in a civil dispute. The respective parties have to work out their remedy before 3/5

the competent civil Court. However, the respondent police is directed to furnish a copy of the closure report to the petitioner, enabling her to work out her remedy in the manner known to law, before the appropriate forum.

5.Accordingly, this writ petition is closed. No costs. 03.06.2025 Index:Yes Internet:Yes vrn To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi District.

Tenkasi.

2.The Inspector of Police, Uthumalai Police Station, Tenkasi District.

4/5

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

vrn Order made in 03.06.2025 5/5