R.Thulasi vs The State Rep. By
2021 Latest Caselaw 11542 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 11542 Mad
Judgement Date : 11 June, 2021

Madras High Court

R.Thulasi vs The State Rep. By on 11 June, 2021

                                                                             Crl.O.P.No.9811 of 2021

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED:      11.06.2021

                                                        CORAM:

                             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

                                                 Crl.O.P.No.9811 of 2021


                     R.Thulasi
                     D/o.T.S.Ramamoorthy                                    ... Petitioner

                                                          Vs.

                     1.The State Rep. by
                       The Commissioner of Police,
                       Greater Chennai,
                       No.132, E.V.K.Sampath Road,
                       Vepperry, Chennai - 600 007.

                     2.The Sub Inspector of Police,
                       P-6, Kodungaiyur Police Station,
                       Chennai - 600 118.                                  ... Respondents

                     PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the
                     Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the 2nd respondent police to
                     register the petitioner's complaint dated 09.04.2021.

                                      For Petitioner    : M/s.S.Vijayalakshmi

                                      For Respondents : Mr.A.Damodaran
                                                        Government Advocate (Crl.Side)


                     1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                             Crl.O.P.No.9811 of 2021

                                                          ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the 2nd

respondent police to register a case on the complaint of the petitioner

dated 09.04.2021.

2. Heard M/s.S.Vijayalakshmi, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr.A.Damodaran, learned Government Advocate

(Crl.Side) for the respondents.

3. In view of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of

this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13681 of 2018 and batch of cases, dated

20.09.2018, the petition of this nature is not maintainable before this

Court. The relevant portion of the said order is extracted herewith:-

“35.Accordingly, we answer the references in the following manner, while giving certain directions:

(i) Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked in all circumstances.

(ii) It is not an alternative remedy to Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. but a repository of inherent power.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.No.9811 of 2021

(iii) The normal course of remedy on a failure or refusal to record the information is Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure after due compliance of Section 154(3) Cr.P.C.

(iv) A petition can be filed invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court only after the completion of 15 days from the date of receipt of the information by the Station House Officer. The Registry shall not receive any petition before the expiry of 15 days aforesaid.

(v) No petition shall be entertained without exhausting the remedy under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C.

(vi) An informant can send substance of the information to the Superintendent of Police on knowing the decision of the Station House Officer in not registering the case and proceeding with the preliminary enquiry. After conducting the preliminary enquiry, the Station House Officer's decision in either registering the compliant or closing it will have to be intimated to the informant immediately and in any case not later than 7 days. Once such a decision is made, the informant cannot invoke Section 482 Cr.P.C.as

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.No.9811 of 2021

the remedy lies elsewhere.

(vii) The directions issued by the Director General of Police in the circulars referred are to be strictly complied with by all the Station House Officers.

(viii) The affidavit to be filed shall contain particulars regarding the date of complaint, receipt and the date of sending substances of the information to the superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. and its receipt. The Registry shall not number any petition without due compliance.

(ix) This Court is not bound to direct the police to register the complaint in all cases not withstanding the breach of time table furnished in Lalitha Kumari's case.

(x) The judicial Magistrates, while dealing the petitions under Sections 156(3) Cr.P.C. are directed to keep in mind the narratives in Lalitha Kumari's case with specific reference to the cases, which might require a preliminary enquiry before issuing a direction to investigate and after careful perusal of the complaint. The other directions issued by the learned Single Judge in Sugesan

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.No.9811 of 2021

Transport's case are upheld.

(xi) Eschewing Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is only on exceptional and

rarest of rare cases. Monstrosity of the offence, extreme official apathy

and indifference, need to answer the judicial conscience, and existence

of hostile environment are few of the factors to be borne in mind to bring

a case under the rarest of rare one.”

However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to work out her

remedy in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Division

Bench in the decision referred supra.

4. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is

disposed of.