1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.11.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Criminal Original Petition(MD)No.15546 of 2011 Sivasamy ... Petitioner/Defacto Complainant Vs. 1.The Inspector of General of Police, Trichy Region, Trichy. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District, Karur. 3.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Karur District. 4.The Inspector of Police, CBCID Wing, Madurai Unit, Madurai. ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to transfer the investigation in crime No.32 of 2011 pending on the file of 3rd respondent to the 4th respondent or any other investigation agency. For Petitioner :: Mr.P.Athimoola Pandian For Respondents :: Mr.P.Kannithevan Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to transfer the investigation in crime No.32 of 2011 pending on the file of 3rd respondent to the 4th respondent or to any other investigation agency. 2. Heard Mr.P.Athimoolapandian, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.Kannithevan, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the State. 3.According to the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the complaint of the petitioner has been registered in crime No.32 of 2011 and the investigation is being carried on. He would further submit that in the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13938 of 2011, this Court dismissed the plea of 1st accused and granted anticipatory bail only to the 3rd accused, by holding that the case is serious one and however, the respondent police has taken a longer period to investigate the case, yet they have not filed any charge sheet so far. Therefore, he would request the Court that the investigation pending before the 2nd respondent police may be transferred to some other agency. 4.The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) would submit that the investigation was carried out and after finding the truth that there https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 was no case made out, it has been closed on 23.11.2011 and therefore, there is no need of transfer the case to any other agency. 5.Considering the submissions made by both sides, this Court could see that the petitioner has filed the petition on 25.11.2011 and on that day, according to the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (criminal side), there was no investigation pending, since, it was closed on 23.11.2011. 6.At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that this Court has seriously commented upon the offence committed by the accused 1 and 3, in its order dated 10.11.2011 and however, the 2nd respondent has not considered and the said case was closed. I could see that the said case was closed by the 2nd respondent police afdter the collection of evidence during the investigation and therefore, this Court is not the forum to see whether the order of this Court has not been obeyed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to seek for appropriate remedy, like seeking for reinvestigation as per law. Since there is no investigation pending as on 25.11.2011 and today, there is no possibility of ordering transfer of investigation to any other agency much less to CBCID wing. 7.Accordingly, the petition is dismissed with the aforesaid observation. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (T & P) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S) To 1.The Inspector of General of Police, Trichy Region, Trichy. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District, Karur. 3.The Inspector of Police, CBCID Wing, Madurai Unit, Madurai. 4.The Inspector of Police,District Crime Branch, Karur District. 5. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1. CC to Mr.P.Athimoola Pandian, Advocate, SR.No. 42121 arul Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15546 of 2011 29.11.2011 TR : 13.12.2011: 2p/7c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/