Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10784 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Reserved on

17.06.2022

Delivered on

13.07.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10784 of 2022

Muniyandi

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police,

Sivagangai District,

Sivagangai.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,

Manamadurai Circle,

Sivagangai District.

3.The Inspector of Police,

Thiruppachethi Police Station,

Sivagangai District.

In Crime No.75 of 2022.

... Respondents

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

praying to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to change the investigation in

Crime No.75 of 2022 which is pending on the file of the third

respondent, to any other competent officer.

1/7

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

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10784 of 2022

For Petitioners

: Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian

For Respondent

: Mr.R.Sureshkumar

Govt. Advocate (crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to

change the investigation in Crime No.75 of 2022 from the file of the

third respondent to any other competent officer.

2.Fact:- The petitioner is the defacto complainant and one

Palaniyandi's family are the accused. Both are residing in the same area.

There is a dispute between them with regard to pathway. On 23.05.2022,

at about 10.30 p.m, the accused party assaulted the defacto complainant

and his uncle's son by using Aruval and caused grievous injury on the left

hand knee. Immediately, the defacto complainant was taken to the

Government Hospital, where he lodged the complaint before the third

respondent police as against the accused and the same was registered in

Crime No.75 of 2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 341,

294(b), 324, 506(2) of IPC. Though in the occurrence, two of them had

2/7

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

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10784 of 2022

sustained serious injuries, the third respondent had chosen to register

FIR only for the offences under Section 324 IPC instead of 307 IPC.

Hence, the petitioner/defacto complainant filed this petition seeking

transfer of investigation.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that

in the occurrence, the petitioner sustained grievous injuries, but the third

respondent police registered the case only under Sections 341, 294(b),

324, 506(2) of IPC alone and not under Section 307 IPC. The third

respondent had not investigated the case properly. Hence, the petitioner

sent a representation to the first respondent/Superintendent of Police on

26.05.2022, but no action has been taken. Hence, the present petition.

4.The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for

the respondent police submitted that the case was registered on

24.05.2022 and the same is under investigation. The respondent police

registered the case based on the injuries sustained by the petitioner. The

allegation raised by the petitioner is unsustainable. After investigation, if

3/7

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

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10784 of 2022

any serious charges are made, it will be included at the time of filing the

charge sheet. Hence, at this stage, there is no necessity to change the

investigation to the another Officer.

5. I have considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel

appearing on either side.

6. It is seen from the records that the petitioner is the defacto

complainant and there is a dispute with regard to the pathway between

him and the accused' family. Both are residing adjacent to the pathway.

Since the defacto complainant got favourable verdict from the Court,

there was enmity between them. On the occurrence date, the accused

family assaulted the petitioner and his uncle's son Mohan and caused

grievous injuries to them. The grievance of the petitioner is that the third

respondent police has registered the case only under Sections 341,