Madras High CourtWP(MD)/15524/2019dismissed

S.R. Raja v. The Superintendent Of Police

2019-07-15Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :15.07.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN W.P.(MD)No.15524 of 2019 S.R.Raja ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police Office of the Superintendent of Police Theni, Theni District 2.The Inspector of Police Cumbum South Police Station Cumbum, Theni District 3.S.Kumaravel 4.Gokila Rani 5.Chacko Antony ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is 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 against the respondents 3 to 5 in accordance with law based on the petitioner's complainant dated 13.01.2018 bearing CSR.No.27 of 2018.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.J.Charles Antony Stephen For Respondents 1& 2: Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate (Crl.side)

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action against the respondents 3 to 5 in accordance with law based on the petitioner's complainant dated 13.01.2018 bearing CSR.No.27 of 2018.

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

2. By consent of both parties, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

3. Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2.

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that there was a money dispute between the petitioner and the respondents 3 to 5. Hence, the petitioner lodged a complaint against the respondents 3 to 5 for demanding exorbitant interest. So far no enquiry has been conducted by the second respondent police, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

5. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, an enquiry has been conducted and thereafter, the case was closed as 'Civil in Nature'.

6. Considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that after conducting enquiry, the complaint has been closed as ' Civil in Nature', the prayer sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl. Side) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To 1.The Superintendent of Police Office of the Superintendent of Police Theni, Theni District 2.The Inspector of Police Cumbum South Police Station Cumbum, Theni District 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai +1 cc Mr.T.J.CHARLES ANTONY STEPHEN, Advocate, SR.No. 75864 W.P.(MD)No.15524 of 2019 MSA KK/SAR/26.07.2019/2P-5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/