1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 23.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2164 of 2011 Dr.K.Subbiah ...Petitioner Vs The State by the Sub Inspector of Police Pavoorchatheram Police Station, Tirunelveli District ... Respondent PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondent to register FIR on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner dated 14.02.2011 in Serial No. 93 of 2011 and take action. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Venkatesh For Respondent : Mr.L.Murugan, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the respondent to register FIR on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner dated 14.02.2011 in Serial No. 93 of 2011 and take action. 2. Heard Mr.D.Venkatesh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.L.Murugan, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the State. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the complaint given by the petitioner to the respondent was not registered and the receipt has also been produced before this Court. Hence, he requests this Court that the respondent may be directed to hold an enquiry and to register a case accordingly. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit in his argument that so far no complaint has been received by the respondents as stated by the petitioner. He would further submit that if any complaint is received by the respondents, the respondents will go into the allegations and it will be enquired and if any prima facie case is made out, the said complaint would be registered and the investigation would be commenced. 5. Considering the submissions made by both sides, this Court could see that the receipt has been produced before this Court and therefore, the complaint is pending and if any complaint is pending before the respondent police, he is directed to enquire into the matter and if any prima facie case is found in the complaint, to register the same and if there is no prima facie case found, the respondent is entitled to close the petition. If the complaint has already been closed, the petitioner is not remediless. In case of dropping of the case, the petitioner is not remediless since he is entitled to proceed in accordance with law and also https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 as per the dictum laid down for registration of the complaint in a Judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. reported in 2008(1) MLJ (Crl) 1393 (SC) equivalent to the judgment reported in 2007 (4) Crimes 338 (SC). According to the said judgment, the complainant should approach the Superintendent of Police in the event of the respondent police failed to proceed with the registration of the complaint and on the failure of the Superintendent of Police to pass any order under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C., the complainant should approach the Judicial Magistrate concerned by filing a complaint either under Section 190 Cr.P.C. or under Section 200 Cr.P.C. to pursue the complaint. It is the discretion of the learned Judicial Magistrate either to take cognizance of the case under Section 200 Cr.P.C. or to refer the complaint for being investigated by the jurisdictional police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. So far as this case is concerned, the petitioner is yet to seek remedy before the jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate concerned before approaching this Court. Therefore, it has become necessary for this Court to direct the petitioner to file a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate concerned if necessary, after the formalities before police, ended against the petitioner. On such filing of the complaint, the Judicial Magistrate concerned may either refer under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. or to proceed under Section 200 Cr.P.C. Thereafter only the petitioner to approach this Court, if necessary. Therefore, the petitioner should approach this Court only after exhausting all the process of law as contemplated. But he had approached this Court without following the procedures mentioned therein and therefore this Court has no other option to dispose the petition with the aforesaid observations. Accordingly, this Petition is disposed of. SD ASST REGISTRAR ( CRL SIDE ) /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASST REGISTRAR vsg To 1. The Sub Inspector of Police Pavoorchatheram Police Station Tirunelveli District 2. The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai DM:2011::MARCH:08::: Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2164 of 2011 23.02.2011 2P:3C: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/