Skip to content


Navamani Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by Home Secretary, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai and Others - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai Madurai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberW.P.(MD)No. 10884 of 2008
Judge
AppellantNavamani
RespondentThe State of Tamil Nadu rep. by Home Secretary, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai and Others
Excerpt:
.....the same to the respondent no.4, investigation of the case by a competent officer and file a final report before the jurisdictional magistrate within the time stipulated by this court.) 1. the writ petitioner has filed this writ petition for investigation of the murder of her son by a competent officer and file a final report before the jurisdictional magistrate. 2. that on 20.10.2007, the writ petitioner's son was murdered at valliyoor market. the writ petitioner suspected that one ayyapillai and his henchmen isairaja, ruban, manickam and kannadi manickam have attacked her son udayasankar with deadly weapons and murdered him. 3. it is also informed that there was another complaint by the said ayyapillai as the counterblast to her complaint. on 21.10.2007, the petitioner received.....
Judgment:

(Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent No.3 to withdraw the case in Crime No.155 of 2007 on the file of the respondent No.3 and entrust the same to the respondent No.4, investigation of the case by a competent officer and file a final report before the Jurisdictional Magistrate within the time stipulated by this Court.)

1. The writ petitioner has filed this writ petition for investigation of the murder of her son by a Competent Officer and file a final report before the Jurisdictional Magistrate.

2. That on 20.10.2007, the writ petitioner's son was murdered at Valliyoor Market. The Writ Petitioner suspected that one Ayyapillai and his henchmen Isairaja, Ruban, Manickam and Kannadi Manickam have attacked her son Udayasankar with deadly weapons and murdered him.

3. It is also informed that there was another complaint by the said Ayyapillai as the counterblast to her complaint. On 21.10.2007, the petitioner received an information that the body of her son was lying down near Railway track near Kottayadi. A case was registered by the third respondent/Railway Police under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.155 of 2007.

4. The writ petitioner has made a complaint to the Valliyoor Police Station alleging that it is not a case of suicide and it is a case of murder. It is alleged that Valliyoor Police refused to receive the complaint from her and no action was taken against the accused persons, as the accused is an influential person in the locality. Therefore, the writ petitioner prays that the case should be investigated and the final report should be filed by a competent officer.

5. The third respondent/Railway Police has filed a counter affidavit, wherein, it is found that there are cases in counter against each other, namely, the deceased as well as the fifth respondent/Ayyapillai and others. It is also stated that for the same incident, a case in crime No.176 of 2008 under Section 174 Cr.P.C., @ 306 IPC was registered on 15.05.2008. The said case was further investigated by the Inspector of Police, Valliyoor Police Station and the accused Ayyapillai and Yesudhas were arrested on 24.06.2008 and remanded to prison. On 27.06.2008 a final report was filed and the accused were charged under Section 306 IPC.

6. This being so, the prayer of the writ petitioner has already been addressed to and the final report was also filed before the Jurisdictional Magistrate.

7. In view of above circumstances, this writ petition is closed with a liberty to the petitioner to work out her remedy in the manner known to law. No costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //