Jeyakumar V v. The Inspector General Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.09.2024 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR W.P.(MD)No.21168 of 2024 V.Jeyakumar
...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Police, South Zone, 2.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.
4.The Inspector of Police, North Taluk Police Station, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.
5.Kamala Kannan Sub Inspector of Police, North Taluk Police Station, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.
6.The Sub Inspector of Police, North Taluk Police Station, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.
1/6
7.Ganesan ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 3 to take criminal action against the fifth respondent and their men based on the petitioner's complaint dated 04.07.2024 by investigating the same to take further action in the matter according to law within a time frame fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.R.Boomee Rajan For R1, R3, R4 & R6 : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate (Civil Side)
ORDER
The Writ Petition has been filed, invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking orders to direct the respondents 1 and 3 to take criminal action against the fifth respondent and their men based on the writ petitioner's complaint dated 04.07.2024 by investigating the same to take further action in the matter according to law within a time frame fixed by this Court.
2/6
2. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner would submit that on the basis of the complaint given by the seventh respondent, the fifth respondent directed the writ petitioner to appear for enquiry, that though the writ petitioner informed that he was not the person against whom the complaint was given by the seventh respondent, without accepting the version of the writ petitioner that he has no connection whatever with the seventh respondent, on 14.06.2024, he was forcibly taken by the fifth respondent and brutally attacked and that he had suffered bone injuries.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1, 3, 4 and 6 would submit that in pursuance of the message sent by the seventh respondent through Whatsapp that he is going to consume poison, CSR came to be registered and directed the writ petitioner to appear for enquiry, that the writ petitioner along with Ex Public Prosecutor had appeared for enquiry and they have entered into a compromise and that there was no occurrence as alleged by the writ petitioner on 14.06.2024 and moreover, the writ petitioner has produced some X-ray alleged to have taken on 06.07.2024, 20 days after the 3/6
alleged occurrence. He would further submit that on the basis of the complaint given by the writ petitioner, enquiry is pending before the Additional Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.
4. Considering the submissions made on either side, the Additional Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District is directed to conduct enquiry on the writ petitioner's complaint and take a decision within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
05.09.2024 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No csm To 1.The Inspector General of Police, South Zone, 2.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
4/6
3.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.
4.The Inspector of Police, North Taluk Police Station, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.
5.The Sub Inspector of Police, North Taluk Police Station, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.
6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, 5/6
K.MURALI SHANKAR, J csm Order made in W.P.(MD)No.21168 of 2024 Dated : 05.09.2024 6/6