Karuppaiah Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District and Another

Karuppaiah vs The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Jun 28, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1190174

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1190174
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: The Honourable Dr.(Mrs.) Justice S. Vimala
Decided On: Jun 28, 2016
Case Number: Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 9270 of 2016
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Karuppaiah

Respondent

The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District and Another

Excerpt

(prayer: criminal original petition is filed under section 482 of cr.p.c., to direct the 2nd respondent to register the complaint dated 26.01.2016 preferred by the petitioner for the offences punishable under sections 294(b), 341 and 506(ii) ipc and to take action against the accused in accordance with law.) 1. this petition has been filed, seeking to direct the 2nd respondent to register the complaint dated 26.01.2016 preferred by the petitioner for the offences punishable under sections 294(b), 341 and 506(ii) ipc and to take action against the accused in accordance with law. 2. heard the learned counsel on either side. 3. according to the learned government advocate (crl.side), based on the complaint preferred by the petitioner against the proposed accused, enquiry has been conducted and it has been subsequently closed. 4. in view of the submission made by the learned government advocate (crl.side), this criminal original petition is closed. the 2nd respondent is directed to furnish a copy of the closure report to the petitioner within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already given. on receipt of the same, it is open to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to direct the 2^nd respondent to register the complaint dated 26.01.2016 preferred by the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 341 and 506(ii) IPC and to take action against the accused in accordance with law.)

1. This petition has been filed, seeking to direct the 2^nd respondent to register the complaint dated 26.01.2016 preferred by the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 341 and 506(ii) IPC and to take action against the accused in accordance with law.

2. Heard the learned counsel on either side.

3. According to the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), based on the complaint preferred by the petitioner against the proposed accused, enquiry has been conducted and it has been subsequently closed.

4. In view of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), this Criminal Original Petition is closed. The 2^nd respondent is directed to furnish a copy of the closure report to the petitioner within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already given. On receipt of the same, it is open to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties Karuppaiah vs The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District... Same Subject Criminal Same Judge The Honourable Dr.(Mrs.) Justice S. Vimala