SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 7574

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
PUGALBALAN – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of Police – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12-01-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA WP Crl. No.1784 of 2025 Pugalbalan ..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Commissioner of Police, O/o. Greater Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.

2. The Inspector of Police F-2, Egmore Police Station, Chennai – 600 007.

3. Shanthakumari 4. Kishorekumar

5. Mary Sera

6. Baskar 7. Megala

8. Vijayaganesh

9. Uma Thirumurugu ..Respondent(s)

Prayer: This writ petition (Crl.) has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 08.02.2024 and initiate suitable proceedings against the respondents 3 to 9 in accordance with law.

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.D.Bharathy For Respondent(s) : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 and R2

ORDER

This writ petition (Crl.) has been filed to direct the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 08.02.2024 and to consequently initiate suitable proceedings against the respondents 3 to 9 in accordance with law.

2. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that based on the complaint dated based on the representation given by the petitioner, current paper enquiry was conducted in C.No.8642/Cop/visitors/2024 dated 16.12.2024. However, the same has now been closed, as the dispute between the parties was found to be civil in nature.

3. Recording the submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, this writ petition (Crl.) is closed with a direction to the respondents police to serve the closure report on the petitioner. However, it is open to the petitioner to challenge the closure report in the manner known to law, if so advised. No costs.

12-01-2026 rap Neutral Citation: Yes/No To

1. The Commissioner of Police, O/o. Greater Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.

2. The Inspector of Police F-2, Egmore Police Station, Chennai – 600 007.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

RAP

12-01-2026

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top