Ashik Ahamed v. State Of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By Its The Superintendent Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.07.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI Ashik Ahamed ... Petitioner versus State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.
... Respondent Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to expeditiously dispose/conduct the enquiry on the petitioner's complaint dated 29.11.2024 within a stipulated time fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.U.Antony Santhosh For Respondent : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor 1/4
ORDER
The petitioner, with a grievance that his complaint dated 29.11.2024 has not been enquired by the respondent Police, has filed this writ petition seeking a direction.
2. When this writ petition is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner lodged the complaint directly before the Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, who in turn forwarded the same to the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Dindigul, for enquiry. Though the petitioner was summoned for enquiry and he has appeared for enquiry on 16.12.2024, he has refused to give proper reply to the queries made by the Police during the enquiry. Therefore, they have closed the petitioner's complaint on the same day, i.e. on 16.12.2024. 2/4
3. Recording the said submission, this writ petition is closed with a direction to the respondent Police to furnish a copy of the closure report to the petitioner enabling him to workout his remedy in the manner known to law. No costs.
02.07.2025 ogy NCC : Yes / No.
Index : Yes / No.
Internet : Yes / No.
To
1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.
2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
3/4
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
ogy 02.07.2025 4/4