← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/28766/2024dismissed

K. Sabdharishi v. The Superintendent Of Police

2025-02-19Honourable Mr Justice B.Pugalendhi5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.02.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI K. Sabdharishi ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, No.293, M.K.N.Road, Alandur, Chennai - 600 016.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District, Trichy - 620 020.

3. The State Represented By, The Inspector of Police, GH Police Station, Trichy District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to conduct enquiry proceedings based on the letter issued by the 1st respondent Petition No.14689/2024/POL/TR dated 15.11.2024 by considering the petitioner representation dated 05.11.2024 . 1/5

For Petitioner : Mr. K.Sheenivasan For Respondents : Mr.T.Senthilkumar Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to conduct enquiry proceedings based on the letter issued by the 1st respondent Petition No.14689/2024/POL/TR, dated 15.11.2024 by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 05.11.2024. 2.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

3.It appears that the petitioner is having some issues with his wife and they are living separately. It is the grievance of the petitioner that he has purchased all the properties in his wife's name. He lodged a complaint before the 3rd respondent Police station and the same was not registered. Therefore, this petitioner has approached the concerned Judicial Magistrate, obtained an order under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., and thereafter, a case was registered on the file of 3rd respondent Police Station in Cr.No. 542 of 2024 as against his wife, son and daughter. 2/5

4.It is the further grievance of the petitioner that the investigation has not been conducted by the 3rd respondent police. Therefore, he has lodged a complaint before the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department, as if, he was exploited by the Investigation Officer. In this regard, the petitioner has submitted a representation to the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department and the representation has been forwarded by the first respondent/Superintentent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department to the Commissioner of Police, Trichy District for his disposal on 15.11.2024. Therefore, he has filed this writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the second respondent to conduct an enquiry proceedings, based on the letter of the first respondent, dated 15.11.2024. 5.When this writ petition is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submits that the complaint of the petitioner has been forwarded by the 1st respondent, which was duly enquired by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Trichy and it was closed.

3/5

6.In view of the above facts, in the event, if the petitioner is having any grievance as against the investigation officer in Cr.No.524 of 2024, the petitioner has to work out his remedy by way of filing necessary application before the concerned Court. This Court is not inclined to entertain this petition. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. 19.02.2025 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No PNM To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, No.293, M.K.N.Road, Alandur, Chennai - 600 016.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District, Trichy - 620 020.

3. The State Represented By, The Inspector of Police, GH Police Station, Trichy District.

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

4/5

B.PUGALENDHI , J.

PNM 19.02.2025 5/5