Advocates:
['M/S K SAKTHIVEL', '', 'R RAVANAN', 'G PADMAVATHI', 'V SARATHA DEVI', 'M/S N KANNAN &', '', 'P PARANJOTHI', 'proof not filed', 'AGPW']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.03.2022

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ

WP NO.39872 OF 2005

T.Arul Chezhian

...

Petitioner

Vs.

1.Jeevarathinam

Inspector of Police

Central Crime Branch - 3

Office of the Commissioner of Police

Egmore, Chennai.

2.The Commissioner of Police

Office of the Commissioner of Police

Egmore,

Chennai.

3.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu

Public Department

Fort St. George,

Secretariat, Chennai.

4.M.Sakthi @ Sathiamoorthy

Power of Attorney of M/s.Dish Asia Ltd.,

No.2, 27th Street, 7th Avenue,

Ashok Nagar, Chennai - 83.

(R4 impleaded as per order dated

04.07.2006 by MJPJ in WPMP No.1923/06)

... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus,

directing the second and third respondents to initiate

department proceedings against the first respondent and direct

the respondents to pay a monetary compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-

to the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sakthivel

For Respondents: Mr.T.Venkatesh Kumar

1 to 3

Special Government Pleader

For Respondent 4:Mr.Kannan

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

O R D E R

The petitioner comes before this Court on a complaint

that he was taken to City Crime Branch on 27.08.2005 at around

06.00 am by two Police Constables, wherein, he was threatened

with dire consequences of arrest at the behest of one M.Sakthi @

Sathiamoorthy, who was a Power of Attorney of one Guganathan,

with whom he had business transactions. Alleging that the

petitioner cheated the Guganathan, the first respondent forced

him to sign a Memorandum of Understanding and taken away all the

equipments belonging to him forcibly. The petitioner also made a

representation to the first respondent on 19.10.2005 and met the

Director General of Police on 20.10.2005 followed by a reminder

dated 02.11.2005 to the second respondent. Though the petitioner

was called for an enquiry on 04.11.2005 by the Assistant

Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch Team III, no further

action was taken. FIR registered in DFIR No.284 of 2005 was also

closed after obtaining two cheques to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/-

each and realising the same on par the post illegal action taken

by the first respondent. The petitioner sought for initiation of

departmental proceedings against the first respondent as well as

claimed damages to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-.

2.The first respondent was impleaded in his personal

capacity and he has denied all the allegations. According to

him, the Memorandum of Understanding was entered between the

parties outside the Police Station premises and that it was

executed in front of a Notary Public. Pursuant to the Memorandum

of Understanding, he has handed over two cheques and agreed to

return all the equipments belonging to the defacto complainant.

After recording the amicable settlement, the complaint was

closed as "mistake of fact" and that he has not committed any

illegal act. The action of the petitioner after a period of two

months is an afterthought and therefore, the writ petition is

liable to be dismissed.

3.The counter filed by the second respondent /

Commissioner of Police would state that there was a complaint

against the petitioner under Sections 409 and 420 IPC and on

10.08.2005, for the complaint that the petitioner collected a

sum of Rs.26.25 Lakhs from various organisations from 04/2004 to

12/2004 for preparing Tamil programmes for the Television.

Thereafter, both the parties assisted by their respective

counsel entered into a compromise outside the Police Station

premises and they have handed over two cheques for Rs.1,50,000/-

each and also handed over the equipments and office premises to

the defacto complainant. Therefore, the first respondent dropped

action in Crime No.622/2005. There