Madras High Court
Vinothkumar vs P.Mukeshkumar on 15 July, 2021
W.A.No.584 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.07.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
W.A.No.584 of 2017 and CMP.No.8201/2017
1. Vinothkumar
2. Thirumalaisamy ... Appellants
-vs-
1. P.Mukeshkumar
2. P.Rakeshkumar
3. The Commissioner of Police,
Coimbatore-18.
4. The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Coimbatore-18.
5. The Assistant Commissioner of Police
Law and Order, West Wing,
R.S.Puram, Coimbatore.
6. The Inspector of Police,
B.3 Variety Hall Police Station (L&O),
Coimbatore.
7. Kishan Rawal ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
against the order dated 21.04.2017 in W.P.No.7049/2017 passed by a
learned Single Judge of this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.A.No.584 of 2017
For Appellants : Mr.Raja
for Mr.J.Pothiraj
For respondents : Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel for R1, R2
Mr.T.Arunkumar,
Govt. Advocate for R3 to 6
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was pronounced by T.RAJA.J)
This Writ Appeal has been directed against the impugned order
dated 21.04.2017 passed in W.P.No.7049/2019 by a learned Single
Judge of this Court.
2. In the said Writ Petition seeking Writ of Mandamus, directing
the Official respondents therein to remove forthwith all the
unauthorised persons including the respondents 5 and 6/the appellants
herein and their henchmen/goondas and goons from the premises at
1st Floor in Paras Plaza, Door No.705/706, Raja Street, Coimbatore-
641 001 to facilitate the writ petitioners to enter into the said premises
and also to provide adequate police protection to them, the learned
Single Judge, considering the fact that a case has been registered in
Cr.No.434/2017 on 20.04.2017 for the offences under Sections 454,
506(2) IPC by the Inspector of Police, B3 Variety Hall Police Station,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.584 of 2017
Coimbatore against the appellants herein, held that the FIR is not
reflecting the registration of the case for any such offences and
therefore, based on the counter affidavit filed by the Inspector of
Police, B3 Variety Hall Police Station, came to the conclusion that there
was a partisan approach adopted by the 4 th respondent and
accordingly, transferred the case in Crime No.434/2017 from the file of
the 4th respondent therein/6th respondent herein, namely, the
Inspector of Police, Variety Hall Police Station, Coimbatore to CBCID,
Coimbatore. Aggrieved thereby, the present Writ Appeal has been
filed by the respondents 5 and 6 therein.
3. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, learned
Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 3 to 6 herein
submitted that the prayer in the Writ Appeal has become infructuous
because the Inspector of Police, OCU, Crime Branch CID, Coimbatore
City submitted a report before the Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Coimbatore to treat this case as ''Further Action Dropped''. In support
of his submission, the learned Government Advocate has also placed
on record an affidavit along with a copy of the judgment and decree
passed in O.S.No.149/2017 dated 14.12.2017 by the learned Principal
District Munsif, Coimbatore and also the order passed by the learned
Single Judge of this Court dated 21.04.2017 in W.P.No.7049/2017 and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.584 of 2017
Section 161 (3) Cr.P.C. statement of Mukeshkumar.
4. A perusal of the final report submitted before the learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore clearly shows that the
complainant during examination has stated that he did not want any
further action on his complaint as they have settled their issue
amicably and it further says that he has also taken possession of his
disputed shop from the FIR named accused. Therefore, he did not
want any further action on his complaint. The relevant portion in the
final report is extracted here under:
''When the complainant was further examined after
receipt of the document expert's opinion, he also did not
want any further action on his complaint as they have
settled their issue amicably. The statement of the defacto
complainant u/s.164 CrPC was recorded. In the 164
Cr.P.C. statement he has stated that he took possession of
his disputed shop from the FIR named accused and he does
not want any action on his complaint.
Under the above circumstance order may kindly be
passed to treat the case as Further Action Dropped.''
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.584 of 2017
5. Recording the statement of the learned Government
Advocate for the respondents 3 to 6 and also the 'Further Action
Report' of the 6th respondent herein, the Writ Appeal is dismissed as
infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition
is closed.
(T.R.J.,) (V.S.G.J.,)
15.07.2021
tsi
To
1. The Commissioner of Police,
Coimbatore-18.
2. The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Coimbatore-18.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police
Law and Order, West Wing,
R.S.Puram, Coimbatore.
4. The Inspector of Police,
B.3 Variety Hall Police Station (L&O),
Coimbatore.
T.RAJA, J.
and
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
tsi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.584 of 2017
W.A.No.584/2017
15.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
