Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

M.Sridharan vs The Superintendent Of Police
2022 Latest Caselaw 10839 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 10839 Mad
Judgement Date : 22 June, 2022

Madras High Court
M.Sridharan vs The Superintendent Of Police on 22 June, 2022
                                                                          W.P. No. 15441 of 2022

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 22.06.2022

                                                         CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

                                                 W.P. No. 15441 of 2022

                       M.Sridharan,
                       S/o. Murugadass                                       ... Petitioner
                                                               Vs.

                       1.The Superintendent of Police,
                         Cuddalore Dt.-607 001.

                       2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
                          Neyveli Township,
                          Cuddalore Dt.-607 803.

                       3. The Inspector of Police,
                          Thermal Police Station,
                          Neyveli, Cuddalore Dt.-607 807.

                       4. The Chairman,
                          Neyveli Lignite Corporation India (Ltd.),
                          Corporate Office,
                          Block-1, Neyveli – 607 801.

                       5. Joseph Peter Antony,

                       6. J. Andhony,
                          S/o. Joseph Peter Antony                           ... Respondents




                       1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                  W.P. No. 15441 of 2022

                       PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
                       India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to
                       register F.I.R. basis on the 3rd respondent's CSR No.408/2021 dated
                       25.12.2021 and recover the cheated amount from the 5th and 6th
                       respondents.
                                            For Petitioner    : Mr.A.Kanaka Velappan

                                            For Respondents : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan,
                                                              Additional Public Prosecutor.
                                                              For R1 to R3

                                                        ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to direct the

3rd respondent to register the F.I.R. based on its CSR No.408/2021 and to

recover the cheated amount from 5th and 6th respondents.

2. Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

for the respondents 1 to 3 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 third respondent police.

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

Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents 1 to 3.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 15441 of 2022

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 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 3rd 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 Writ Petition is disposed of.

22.06.2022 Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order rpp/nr

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No. 15441 of 2022

N.SATHISH KUMAR,J.

Rpp/nr

To

1.The Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore Dt.-607 001.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore Dt.-607 803.

3. The Inspector of Police, Thermal Police Station, Neyveli, Cuddalore Dt.-607 807.

4. The Chairman, Neyveli Lignite Corporation India (Ltd.), Corporate Office, Block-1, Neyveli – 607 801.

5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

W.P.No.15441 of 2022

22.06.2022

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

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter