Savithiri .K v. The Director General Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.03.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Savithiri .K ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.

3. State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Traffic, Kottampatti Police Station, Kottampatti, Madurai District 625 103.

4. S.Jerald ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st 1/5

respondent to issue necessary direction to the 3rd respondent to take appropriate action as against the 4th respondent, based on the petitioner's complaint dated 18.09.2020 made to the 3rd respondent, on the basis of the petitioner representation dated 16.02.2024 made to the 1st respondent.

For Petitioner : No Appearance For R1 to R3 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the first respondent to issue necessary direction to the third respondent to take appropriate action as against the fourth respondent, based on the petitioner's complaint dated 18.09.2020 sent to the third respondent, on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 16.02.2024 sent to the first respondent.

2.There is no representation for the petitioner. 2/5

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioner's representation is still pending. Earlier the petitioner lodged a complaint for the accident occurred on 09.06.2020, for which an FIR in Crime No.430 of 2020 was registered for the offences under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC and thereafter, the victim died and the same was not informed to the third respondent police and the body of the victim was also not produced for post-mortem. Therefore, the investigation agency is unable to alter the sections. However, the petitioner's representation will be considered and disposed of within a period of one week.

4.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court, without even issuing notice to the private respondent, is inclined to pass order.

5.Considering the prayer of the petitioner, instead of dismissing this petition for non-prosecution, this Court directs the third respondent to consider the petitioner's representation within a period of one week in accordance with law.

3/5

6.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 13.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR To

1. The Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.

3. State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Traffic, Kottampatti Police Station, Kottampatti, Madurai District 625 103.

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

4/5

P.DHANABAL , J.

LR 13.03.2025 5/5