M.Balu vs The State Represented By
2022 Latest Caselaw 10188 Mad

                                                                              Crl.O.P.No.3621 of 2022

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                              DATED: 15.06.2022

                                                      CORAM

                            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

                                            Crl.O.P.No.3621 of 2022

                M.Balu                                                        ... Petitioner
                                                        Vs.


                1.The State Represented by
                  Superintendent of Police,
                  Mayiladuthurai District.

                2.The State Represented by
                  Inspector of Police, Vaitheswaran Koil,
                  Sirkali Taluk, Mayiladuthurai District.                     ... Respondents

                PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.,
                to direct the respondents to register the complaint dated 09.10.2021 and
                25.10.2021 under the Provisions of Prevention of SC & ST Atrocities Act and
                its Rules and investigate the matter in accordance with the law.


                                     For Petitioner    : Mr.S.Arokiamaniraj
                                     For Respondents : Mr.N.Muthuvel
                                                       Government Advocate (Criminal Side)




                1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                Crl.O.P.No.3621 of 2022

                                                       ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the

respondents to register the complaint dated 09.10.2021 and 25.10.2021 under

the Provisions of Prevention of SC & ST Atrocities Act and its Rules and

investigate the matter.

2. Mr.N.Muthuvel, learned Government Advocate for the respondents

would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, enquiry has

been conducted and the same is pending on the file of the second respondent

police.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

Government Advocate for the respondents.

4. The Division Bench of this Court in G.Prabhakaran v. The

Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur, reported in (2018) 2 LW Crl 489 and

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its latest judgment rendered by a three Judge

Bench in M.Subramaniam v. S.Janaki, reported in (2020) 5 CTC 464, after

relying upon Sakiri Vasu's Case, has categorically held that the High Court

cannot issue any direction for registration of FIR. High Court can intervene

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.3621 of 2022

only in extraordinary circumstances and rare cases. However, taking note of the

fact that the complaint is now pending and not been enquired, the Investigation

officer is directed to issue notice to the parties and conduct enquiry as directed

by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of

Uttar Pradesh and others [2014 (2) SCC (1)]. If any cognizable offence is

made out, the respondent police is bound to register the FIR otherwise they may

close the complaint. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of two

weeks from today.

5. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is

disposed of.

15.06.2022 Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order

ham/mtl

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.3621 of 2022

N.SATHISH KUMAR,J.

ham/mtl

To

1.The State Represented by Superintendent of Police, Mayiladuthurai District.

2.The State Represented by Inspector of Police, Vaitheswaran Koil, Sirkali Taluk, Mayiladuthurai District.

Crl.O.P.No.3621 of 2022

15.06.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis