1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.TAMILVANAN Crl.O.P (MD).Nos.16703 of 2011 and 16710 of 2011 M/s. New India Assurance Company Ltd., Rep.by its Deputy Manager N.Ganesapandian, S/o. S.P.Natarajan, No.248, Reka Towers Upstairs, Kamarajar Salai, Madurai - 9. ... Petitioner in both the petitions vs. 1. The Superintendent of Police Madurai Rural, Madurai. 2. The Inspector of Police C6, Karuppayoorani Police Station, Madurai. ... Respondents in both the petitions Criminal Original Petitions filed Section 482 Cr.P.C, seeking an order to direct the second respondent to file the final report in Crime No.484 of 2010 and Crime No.164 of 2010 respectively on the file of the second respondent. For petitioner : Mr.E.Somasundaram in both the petitions For respondents : Mr.K.V.Rajarajan in both the petitions Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) O R D E R Both the Original Petitions have been filed by the petitioner, M/s. New India Assurance Company Ltd., rep. by its Deputy Manager, N.Ganesapandian, Madurai - 9, seeking direction to the second respondent, Inspector of Police, C6, Karuppayoorani Police Station to file the final report in Crime No.484 of 2010 and Crime No.164 of 2010. 2. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the occurrence relating to the case in Crime No.484 of 2010 had taken place on 01.10.2010 and it relates to the motor accident, that was caused by the vehicle, having Registration No. TN 07 AV 2562. The occurrence relating to the case in Crime No.164 of 2010 had taken place on 16.03.2010 and it relates to the motor accident, that was caused by the vehicle, having Registration No. TN 59V 8160. 3. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner herein is neither defacto-complainant nor arrayed as accused. Learned Government Advocate submitted that the petitioner, being a third party to the case has no loco standi to seek a direction against the second respondent, Inspector of Police to file a final report (charge sheet). https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Insurance company has to pay interest, based on the date of occurrence, however, he could not get the copy of the charge sheet, since the same was not filed by the respondent. It is not in dispute hat the petitioner is a public undertaking and the copy of the charge sheet is needed for the purpose of raising the defence in the M.C.O.P case. 5. In the aforesaid circumstances, while dismissing the criminal original petitions as not maintainable on the ground that the petitioner has no loco standi, to meet the ends of justice, I direct the second respondent to furnish copy of the charge sheet, if already filed, after getting copying charge, within one week or after filing charge sheet, before the Court below. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (A.S) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Superintendent of Police Madurai Rural, Madurai. 2. The Inspector of Police C6, Karuppayoorani Police Station, Madurai. 3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. + 1 cc to Mr.E.Somasundaram, Advocate, SR No.44939 Crl.O.P (MD).Nos.16703 and 16710 of 2011 21-12-2011 tsvn RJ/28.12.11 2p/5c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/