B.Ramalingam vs The Superintendent Of Police
2023 Latest Caselaw 169 Mad

                                                                          Crl.O.P.No.32622 of 2022

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                              DATED: 04.01.2023

                                                      CORAM

                        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN

                                           Crl.O.P.No.32622 of 2022


                B.Ramalingam                                                                   ...
                Petitioner
                                                       Vs.

                1. The Superintendent of Police,
                   Thiruvannamalai District (DPO),
                   Thriuvannamalai.

                2. State Rep by,
                   The Inspector of Police,
                   Chethupattu Police & Taluk,
                   Thiruvannamalai District.                                                   ...
                Respondents


                PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.,
                to direct the respondents to take action on the petitioner's complaint dated
                20.11.2022.

                                     For Petitioner     : Mr.A.E.Kalaiselvan

                                     For Respondents    : Mr.S.Santhosh,
                                                          Government Advocate (crl.side)




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                1/6
                                                                                     Crl.O.P.No.32622 of 2022




                                                      ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the

respondents to take action on the petitioner's complaint dated 20.11.2022.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's

father Balakrishnan was killed in a suspicious manner in the year 2016. Even

thereafter Elumalai and his wife and sons were harassing the petitioner and his

mother and other family members. When things stood like this, on 13.11.2022,

petitioner's mother Kannayee Ammal went to her land and thereafter she had

not returned. On the next day ie on 14.11.2022, it was came to light that the

petitioner's mother Kannayee Ammal was killed by Elumalai and his sons and

thrown the body into the well. This fact of the death of the petitioner's mother

was informed to the petitioner at about 10.00.a.m on 14.11.2022. Thereafter,

petitioner and his sister came to the village and attempted to take the body of

their mother and they found injuries and swellings in the face of her mother and

they prevented the petitioner and his siblings from taking the body and also

made arrangements for burning the body. The petitioner wanted the body to be

interred. However, without hearing the request of the petitioner, Elumalai and

his son and his sister-in-law had burnt the body. There is a suspicion in the

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

Crl.O.P.No.32622 of 2022

death of the petitioner's mother Kannayee Ammal. Petitioner apprehends that

Elumalai and his son along with others are responsible for the death of the

petitioner's mother. Despite giving the complaints on 20.11.2022 and

25.11.2022, respondent police had not taken any steps in registering the FIR.

Therefore, present petition is filed.

3. In reply, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for

the respondent submitted that, on the basis of the complaint dated 20.11.2022

given by the petitioner, enquiry is pending in C.S.R.No.934 of 2022. He further

submit that enquiry will be expedited and disposal of the complaint will be done

in the manner known to law.

4. Considered the rival submissions. This Court on going through the

complaint dated 20.11.2022 and 25.11.2022 and the submissions of the learned

counsels on both the sides, it is seen that there are specific allegations made

aginst the Elumalai and his sons and her sister-in-law, suspecting that they are

responsible for the petitioner's mother. Therefore, this Court directs the

respondent police to conduct proper and appropriate enquiry.

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

Crl.O.P.No.32622 of 2022

5. 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 being 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

the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

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

disposed of.

04.01.2023

Internet:Yes/No sma

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

Crl.O.P.No.32622 of 2022

To

1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thirumangalam, Chennai

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

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

Crl.O.P.No.32622 of 2022

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN,J.

Sma

Crl.O.P.No.32622 of 2022

04.01.2023

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