On 15.12.2016, this Court passed the following order:
Mrs.J. Vichitra Mary, Sub Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Nagapattinam, is present.
2.Mr.C.Emalias, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that pursuant to the order dated 06.06.2016 in Crl.O.P.No.9747 of 2016, the petitioner had not given any fresh complaint to the respondent police. However, the petitioner had given a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Nagapattinam on 19.04.2016 which was received by the latter on 22.04.2016 and the same was forwarded to the Anti Land Grabbing Cell, Nagapattinam. Thereafter, the complaint has been transferred by the Anti Land Grabbing Cell, Nagapattinam to the file of the District Crime Branch, Nagapattinam on 20.07.2016. After receipt of the complaint, the Sub Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch had sent four summonses to the petitioner, calling upon him to appear before enquiry. The petitioner received summonses and has failed to appear before enquiry.
3.Under such circumstances, the respondent police is directed to proceed with the enquiry in accordance with law and report to this Court on 19.01.2017.
Post on 19.01.2017.
2. Today, Ms.J.Vichithra Mary, Sub Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Nagapattinam is present.
3. On instructions, Mr.Emalias, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the Police have completed the enquiry and closed the case on the ground that the petitioner did not cooperate with the enquiry. A copy of the closure report was also sent to the petitioner by post.
4. However, another copy of the closure report is furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner across the Bar.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the petitioner has not received any summons from the Police and that the Police are trying to protect the Advocates, who are said to be involved in the offence.
6. It is also seen that the petitioner has sent a detailed report to the Police on 20.07.2016, wherein he has admitted that he has received summons from the Police for enquiry. The fact remains that the Police have complied with the order passed by this Court by completing the enquiry. Hence, it is not a fit case to issue statutory notice to the respondent Police. However, it is left open to the petitioner to file an application / private complaint under before the Jurisdictional Magistrate, if so advised.
7. The Contempt Petition is closed with the above observation and direction.
31.01.2017 TK To
1.Ms.J.Vichithra Marry The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch Nagappattinam District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor Madras High Court.
P.N.PRAKASH, J.
TK CONT.P.NO.2812 OF 2016 IN CRL.O.P.NO.9747 OF 2016 31.01.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in