Madras High Court
Sangilimuthu vs The Inspector Of Police on 7 January, 2022
W.P.(MD).No.7416 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 07.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
W.P.(MD).No.7416 of 2019
Sangilimuthu
S/o.Veerapathiran : Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police,
Trichy.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Trichy.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Karur.
4.The District Collector,
Karur.
5.The Inspector of Police,
Thogamalai Police Station,
Karur District.
6.Sugumaran,
Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Kulithalai,
Karur District.
7.Mohammed Ithiris,
Inspector of Police,
Thogamalai Police Station,
Karur District. : Respondents
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.7416 of 2019
PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to
take appropriate disciplinary action against the respondents 6 and 7 based
on the representation of the petitioner dated 12.03.2019.
For Petitioner : No appearance
For R1 to R5 : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
For R6 and R7 : Mr.R.Gandhi
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed seeking Mandamus, to direct the
respondents 1 to 4/higher police officials to take appropriate disciplinary
action against the respondents 6 and 7 and to take action for quashing the
case against him in Crime No.243 of 2017.
2. According to the petitioner, he is a law abiding citizen and he
was doing Cable TV business and he hails from a reputed family. The
fifth respondent repeatedly foisting a false case against him and he had
taken him to illegal custody and caused physical and mental torture.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.7416 of 2019
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondent 1 to 5 submitted that the petitioner is the History Sheeter and
he involved in various criminal cases and to prevent the police to take
action again him, he filed this writ petition with false averments. Counter
affidavit filed by the sixth respondent detailing out the conduct of the
petitioner herein.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 6 and 7
would submit that the writ petition is ill conceived, a third party cannot
direct the initiation of departmental and disciplinary proceedings and in
support her submission, he would rely upon the judgment of Hon'ble
Supreme Court reported in 2000 SC 3469 in the case of Rajinit Prasad
Vs. Union of India and others.
5. This Court, on perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the writ
petition and counter affidavit filed by the sixth respondent, is of the view
that the prayer sought for in the writ petition is ill-conceived, which
come before this Court for making allegation against the police man, who
have taken action against him and it is indirect threat to deter the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.7416 of 2019
Investigating Agency from acting in accordance with law. Therefore, this
Writ Petition is dismissed. No Costs.
07.01.2022
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
tta
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Trichy.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Trichy.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Karur.
4.The District Collector,
Karur.
5.The Inspector of Police,
Thogamalai Police Station,
Karur District.
6.Sugumaran,
Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Kulithalai,
Karur District.
7.Mohammed Ithiris,
Inspector of Police,
Thogamalai Police Station,
Karur District.
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.7416 of 2019
tta
W.P.(MD).No.7416 of 2019
07.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
