C.Ranjith v. The Commissioner Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.12.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU C.Ranjith ... Petitioner vs.
1.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Kanyakumari.
2.A.Robert Nirmal Singh 3.Rabi Mohan 4.Mangalam Mary 5.Hema 6.Stella Mary 7.The Superintendant of Police, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
8.State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Thiruvattar Police Station, Kanyakumari District.
... Respondents (Respondents 7 and 8 are impleaded as per order in WMP(MD) No.15570 of 2020 dated 15.12.2020) Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to take appropriate action against the respondents 2 to 6, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 21.10.2020.
For Petitioner : Mr.Niranjan S.Kumar For Respondents 1, 7 & 8 : Mr.R.Srinivasan Government Advocate(Crl.Side)
ORDER
The writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to take appropriate action against the respondents 2 to 6, by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 21.10.2020. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would state that the petitioner is the Manager of Anugraha Charitable Trust situated at Alagiyamandapam, Kanyakumari District. The object of the Trust is to help poor people and women financially and they used to arrange 1/3
loan from the Bank of India to women self help group and the loan amount will be repaid by the beneficiaries of the women self help group by way of monthly instalments to the Bank of India. While so, the respondents 2 to 6 contacted the beneficiaries of women self help group and had falsely stated that the petitioner's Trust had not arranged any loan from the Bank of India and insisted them not to return the loan amount, due to which, some of the beneficiaries failed to pay the monthly instalments to the bank.
He would further state that the respondents 2 to 6 had conspired together and to lower the name and reputation of the Trust, they had also spread rumour stating that the Trust was already closed for 4 months and several criminal cases were registered against the Trust and due to pendency of FIR, the Trust members were absconding and the Superintendent of Police was taking action against the Trust members to detain them under Act 14. While so, on 02.10.2019 when the petitioner and Trust members were collecting loan due amount from the beneficiaries, the respondents 2 and 3 tried to pick money bag from the petitioner and also criminally intimidated him. Therefore, the petitioner sent a representation to the 1st respondent on 21.10.2019 requesting to take appropriate action against the respondents 2 to 6, but no action was taken.
Hence, this writ petition. 3.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) would state that the respondents/police will consider the representation of the petitioner dated 21.10.2019 and take appropriate action within a time frame.
4.Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side), without adverting to the merits of the case, the respondents/police are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 21.10.2019 by giving notice to the respondents 2 to 6 and take appropriate action in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CRL.SIDE) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) 2/3
bala/rm To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Kanyakumari.
2.The Superintendant of Police, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Thiruvattar Police Station, Kanyakumari District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
ORDER MADE IN DATED : 15.12.2020 KM (07.01.2021) 3P 5C 3/3