Kosamattam Finance Company v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI Kosamattam Finance Company Rep. by its Regional Manager, Mr.Ratheeshrajan, S/o.Rajan, Regional Office, Railway Station Road, Nagal Nagar, Dindigul.

... Petitioner versus

1. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2. The Inspector of Police, Dindigul Town North Police Station, Dindigul District.

... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to initiate necessary action on the petitioner's complaint dated 04.09.2024 in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court. 1/4

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Malaikani For Respondents : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petitioner is a private banker. They moved this petition that their complaint dated 04.09.2024 has not been enquired by the respondent Police.

2. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner's complaint was already enquired by the respondent Police. The case of the petitioner is that one Suriyakala has pledged spurious gold in the petitioner Bank and therefore, they want to take action as against the said Suriyakala. According to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the petitioner Bank is not having any document for the so-called pledge. Therefore, the police is under the impression that in order to create some record of spurious gold, the petitioner has lodged a complaint and also filed this petition.

2/4

3. This Court considered the rival submissions made.

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that somebody has pledged spurious gold in their bank. As the petitioner is running a Bank, they must be having an Appraiser in the Bank. During the course of the transaction, if they received the spurious gold, then it is their fault. Therefore, they have to workout their remedy against the customer, who pledged the spurious gold and the Police has nothing to do with the business transaction.

5. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed. No costs. 19.06.2025 ogy NCC : Yes / No.

Index : Yes / No.

Internet : Yes / No.

To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

3/4

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

ogy

2. The Inspector of Police, Dindigul Town North Police Station, Dindigul District.

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

19.06.2025 4/4