Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/17243/2024disposed of

Dhanalakshmi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

2024-10-17Honourable Mr Justice K.Murali Shankar6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.10.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.10823 of 2024 Dhanalakshmi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station, Madurai District.

3.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station, Madurai District.

4.The Inspector of Police, CBCID, Madurai District.

... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to direct the first respondent to transfer the investigation of the case in 1/6

Cr.No.353 of 2024 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station, Madurai District to the file of the Inspector of Police, CBCID, Madurai District.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Anand For Respondents : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking orders to direct the first respondent to transfer the investigation of the case in Cr.No.353 of 2024 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station, Madurai District to the file of the Inspector of Police, CBCID, Madurai District.

2.It is evident from the records that on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner herein, FIR came to be registered in Cr.No.353 of 2024 for the offences under Sections 126, 324(1), 296(b), 115(1), 351(3) BNS and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 and that one Arul Britto Raj has lodged a complaint 2/6

and on that basis, FIR came to be registered in Cr.No.354 of 2024 for the offences under Sections 324(1), 296(b), 115(2) and 351(2) BNS. 3.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the respondents would submit that both the case are case and counter case. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that one Sub Inspector of Police, namely Jeeva, attached to the second respondent Police Station is the real cause for all these lodging complaint and registering FIR against the petitioner and his family members and hence, the petitioner is constrained to file the present petition. He would further submit that the petitioner is having CCTV footages to show the nature of the occurrence.

5.Considering the allegations levelled, the second respondent is directed conduct the investigation in both cases and follow the directions issued by the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.4587 of 2023 (Batch) dated 08.08.2024 and the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Samayanallur Sub Division is directed to monitor the same. The 3/6

petitioner is at liberty to produce CCTV footages before the second respondent and the second respondent is directed to consider the same, while investigating the case.

6.With the above directions, this criminal original petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 17.10.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No gns 4/6

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station, Madurai District.

3.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station, Madurai District.

4.The Inspector of Police, CBCID, Madurai District.

5.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Samayanallur Sub Division, Madurai.

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

5/6

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.

gns 17.10.2024 6/6