Madras High Court
Sathya vs The State Rep By on 5 January, 2023
Crl.O.P.No.170 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.01.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN
Crl.O.P.No.170 of 2023
Sathya ... Petitioner
Vs.
The State rep by
The Inspector of Police,
Kumarapalayam,
Namakkal District. ... Respondent
PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to
direct the respondent to register the case on the basis of the complaint given by
the petitioner on 25.11.2022.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sivakumar
For Respondents : Mr.S.Santhosh,
Government Advocate (crl.side)
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the respondent
to register the case, based on the petitioner's complaint dated 25.11.2022.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.170 of 2023
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs.20,00,00/- as a loan from M/S Vistaar Financial
Services Private Limited. As far as the loan is concerned, the petitioner is liable
to pay a sum of Rs.34,369/- per month to the said company. Due to Covid-19
pandemic, the petitioner was unable to pay the monthly instalment. While so, on
25.11.2022, one Arun, who is the Manager of M/S Vistaar Financial Services
Private Limited and Jeganathan, who is the employee of the said company, came
to the house of the petitioner and threatened her with dire consequences.
Therefore, the petitioner gave a complaint before the respondent police.
However, till date, no FIR has been registered. Hence, the present petition has
been filed.
3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the
respondent submitted that, after a receipt of complaint dated 25.11.2022, the
respondent police had conducted enquiry in CSR No.245 of 2022 and it is
pending. Despite the summon sent to the petitioner, she has not cooperated for
enquiry.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Government Advocate (crl.side) for the respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.170 of 2023
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.
05.01.2023
shk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.170 of 2023
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN,J.
shk
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Kumarapalayam,
Namakkal District.
2. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
Crl.O.P.No.170 of 2023
05.01.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
