1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD).No.1779 of 2011 V.M.Senthilkumar ... Petitioner Vs 1. The Superintendent of Police Trichy Trichy District 2. The State rep. by its Inspector of Police Musiri Police Station Trichy District ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the first respondent to complete the investigation and to file final report in the Crime No. 395 of 2010 on the file of the second respondent within a time frame. *** For Petitioner : Mr.N.R.BALAJI for M/s.Hallmark Associates For Respondents : Mrs.S.Devasena Government Advocate (Crl. Side) O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the first respondent to complete the investigation and to file final report in the Crime No. 395 of 2010 on the file of the second respondent within a time frame. 2. Heard M/s.Hallmark Associates, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.S.Devasena, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the State. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the petitioner has preferred a complaint to the second respondent on 24.08.2010 against the accused persons and the second respondent received the complaint and had issued receipt No. 250/10, and hte accused persons were summoned to the second respondent's police station and the accused persons tender apology for the misdeed. He would further submit in his argument that subsequently, on 29.10.2010 at about 12 noon, the accused persons intercepted the petitioner and scolded him by calling his caste name and thereafter, the petitioner preferred https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 a complaint to the second respondent, on 02.11.2010. He would further submit that after receipt of the complaint, the second respondent registered a case in Crime No. 395 of 2010 for the offences under Section 294(b) of IPC., read with 3(1) (X) SC/ST Act, but no action has been taken. Therefore, he would request the Court that a direction may be issued to the first respondent to complete the investigation and to file a final report in Crime No. 395 of 2010 on the file of the second respondent. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit in her argument that on the complaint given by the petitioner, a case has been registered in Crime No. 395 of 2010 for the offences under Section 294(b) of IPC., read with 3(1) (X) SC/ST Act, and the investigation will be expeditously done and it will be over soon and the final report will be filed very soon. 5. Considering the submissions made by both sides, this Court is inclined to record the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and to direct the first respondent to investigate the case in Crime No. 395 of 2010 as expeditiously as possible and to file a final report, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the abovesaid direction, this Petition is disposed of. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (W) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1. The Superintendent of Police Trichy Trichy District 2. The Inspector of Police Musiri Police Station Trichy District 3. The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai +One cC to M/s.Hallmark Associates, Advocate, SR.No.8662 vsg rl/5c – 25.2.2011 CRL.O.P.(MD).No.1779 of 2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/