← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/23723/2019dismissed

T.Nagarathinam v. The Deputy Inspector General

2019-11-11Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan2 pages

W.P(MD)No.23723 of 2019 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.11.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN W.P(MD)No.23723 of 2019 T.Nagarathinam ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Deputy Inspector General, South Circle, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, At Nagercoil.

3.The Inspector of Police, Eraniel Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

4.Robert Jain, Sub Inspector of Police Eraniel Police Station, Kanyakumari District ... Respondents Prayer : This petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 & 2 to take appropriate action as against the 4th respondent for misusing his official power in the light of the petitioner's representation, dated 25.10.2019.

For Petitioner: Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandhran For R1 to R3 : Mr.R.Anandharaj Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This petition has been filed directing the respondents 1 & 2 to take appropriate action as against the 4th respondent based on the petitioner's representation dated 25.10.2019 for misusing his official power.

2. On the complaint lodged by the petitioner, the third respondent conducted enquiry and found that the petitioner is not a owner of the said vehicle and he has no way connected with the vehicle. Now, the petitioner intends to take action against the 4th respondent for misusing his official power in the light of his representation.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

W.P(MD)No.23723 of 2019

3. Now a days it is very common to file this kind of writ petition to take action as against the police officials for not taking the complaint on file and also not registering the complaint. In the case on hand, on the complaint lodged by the petitioner, the third respondent filed detailed enquiry report and found that the petitioner is not even the owner of the vehicle. On perusal of the records it reveals that originally Sushila George was the original owner and thereafter, ownership was transferred in favour of one Wilfred Shejin. Therefore, no documents have been produced before this Court to proof the ownership of the petitioner.

4. In the result, this writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) vsd To 1.The Deputy Inspector General, South Circle, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, At Nagercoil.

3.The Inspector of Police, Eraniel Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

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

+1 CC to MR.S.R.ARAMACHANDRAN, Advocate ( SR-97363[F] dated 11/11/2019 ) W.P(MD)No.23723 of 2019 11.11.2019 KM/(19.12.2019) 2P 7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2