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.15526 of 2011 V.Kanagaraj ...Petitioner/Defacto complainant Vs. 1.The State represented by The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District,Tirunelveli. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Cheranmahadevi Sub Division,Tirunelveli District. 3.The Inspector of Police, Munneerpallam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.Crime No.385 of 2011 ...Respondents/Respondents PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the 2nd respondent to investigate the case in crime No.385 of 2011 registered by the 3rd respondent in an expeditious manner and complete the same after nabbing the accused persons and seizing the vehicles involved in the said crime and further direct him to file the final report within the stipulated period as prescribed by this Court. For Petitioner :Mr.R.Anand For Respondents:Mr.P.Kannithevan, Govt. Advocate, Crl. Side O R D E R This petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to investigate the case in crime No.385 of 2011 registered by the 3rd respondent in an expeditious manner and complete the same after nabbing the accused persons and seizing the vehicles involved in the said crime and further direct him to file the final report within the stipulated period as prescribed by this Court. 2.Heard Mr.R.Anand, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.Kannithevan, learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the respondent State. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that even though the case in crime No.385 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police has been registered as early as on 30.09.2011, no effective steps have been taken by the respondent police to complete the investigation and to file charge sheet. 4.The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) would submit in his argument that the investigation is being carried on and the respondent police is promptly doing the investigation and he would request the Court that if one month time is grated, the respondent will get a breakthrough and they complete the investigation and file the final report within the stipulated time. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 5.Considering the submissions by the learned Government Advocate (criminal side), this Court is inclined to grant one month time to the 2nd respondent police to complete the investigation in crime No.385 of 2011 pending on the file of the respondent police and to file the final report, as per Rule 7(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1989. 6. With the above said direction, this criminal original petition is ordered. SD ASST REGISTRAR(RTI ACAT) /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASST REGISTRAR arul TO 1.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District,Tirunelveli. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Cheranmahadevi Sub Division,Tirunelveli District. 3.The Inspector of Police, Munneerpallam Police Station,Tirunelveli District. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,Madurai. SB:20/12/2011 2P 5C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15526 of 2011 29.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/