Madras High Court
P.Ramakrishna vs The Superintendent Of Police on 20 January, 2023
Crl.O.P.No.1076 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.01.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN
Crl.O.P.No.1076 of 2023
P.Ramakrishna ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur – 602 001.
2.The Inspector of Police,
SIPCOT Police Station, gummidipoondi – 601 201.
3.M.Vil Wazhi
4.N.Kalidass
5.P.Ramakrishnan
6.R.Ramachandran ... Respondents
PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.,
to issue a direction to the 2nd respondent to register a case on the complaint
dated 17.10.2022, investigate and file final report.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Swarnavel
For R-1 & 2 : Mr.S.Santhosh,
Government Advocate (crl.side)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/5
Crl.O.P.No.1076 of 2023
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed directing the 2nd
respondent to register a case on the complaint dated 17.10.2022, investigate and
file final report.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner
purchased a property in Survey Nos.604/3CA, 614/1C, 641/1CB, 614/1CC,
1CB, 1C in Gummidipoondi District from one Chandra on 18.01.1982. Taking
advantage of the fact that the petitioner's name and 5 th respondent's name are
same, 5th respondent had executed a Power of Attorney Deed, in favour of 6th
respondent in the year 2013. In the said Power of Attorney Deed, 3rd and 4th
respondents stood as witnesses. Thereafter, 6th respondent sold the property to
the 3rd respondent. Therefore, the petitioner had given a complaint against the
respondents 3 to 6 on 17.10.2022. However, no FIR was registered,
necessitating filing of this petition.
3. In response, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side)
submitted that on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner,
CSR.No.389 of 2022 is pending.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.1076 of 2023
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the respondents.
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 second 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.1076 of 2023
6. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, especially the allegation
of impersonation of the petitioner, creation of Power of Attorney Deed and Sale
Deed by the accused in conspiracy with each other, this Court disposes this
petition, with the above direction.
20.01.2023
Internet:Yes/No
gd
To
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur – 602 001.
2.The Inspector of Police,
SIPCOT Police Station, gummidipoondi – 601 201.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.1076 of 2023
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN,J.
gd
Crl.O.P.No.1076 of 2023
20.01.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
