1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Criminal Original Petition(MD)No.16261 of 2011 G.Gousalya ...Petitioner Vs. 1. The Superintendent of Police Madurai District 2. The Sub-Inspector of Police Thirunagar Police Station Madurai District. ...Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to direct the respondent to incorporate the appropriate sections and implead the accused on the basis of the petitioner complaint dated 4/12/2011 in Cr.No.517 of 2011 on the file of the second respondent Police. For Petitioner :: Mr.T.Vadivelan For Respondents :: Mr.P.Kannithevan, GA (Criminal Side) O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the respondent to incorporate the appropriate sections and implead the accused on the basis of the petitioner complaint dated 4/12/2011 in Cr.No.517 of 2011 on the file of the second respondent Police. 2.Heard Mr.T.Vadivelan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.Kannithevan, learned Government (Crl.side) appearing for the respondents. 3.According to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent police has registered the complaint given by the petitioner in Crime No.517 of 2011 on its file and had commenced the investigation. He would further submit that the brother of the defacto complainant had sustained head injury and it was serious in nature and the medical report produced by the petitioner would go to show that it is serious one. Further the second respondent has not altered the sections and are continuing the investigation without any alteration. 4.He would further submit in his argument that the accused person, who was in connection with the complaint has not been implicated in the FIR and suitable directions may be issued for implicating the necessary party in the FIR as well as to alter the offences according to the gravity of the injuries sustained by the brother of the defacto complainant. 5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit in his argument that the investigation is offing and the wound certificate is awaited and if for any reason the sections as mentioned in the FIR have to be altered after receiving the wound certificate. He would further submit that during the investigation, the allegations made in the complaint would https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 be considered and if the evidence is gathered regarding the involvement of the particular persons mentioned in the FIR who were not implicated in the FIR and necessary charge sheet will be filed after completion of the investigation. 6.Recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) that the persons sought to have impleaded may be considered on the available evidence and also the sections are altered on the basis of the wound certificate to be obtained in the case by the respondent police. The respondent police is also directed to do the investigation as per the submission of the learned Government Advocate and to file charge sheet as expeditiously as possible. With the above directions, this petition is disposed of. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AS) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S) To 1. The Superintendent of Police Madurai District 2. The Sub-Inspector of Police Thirunagar Police Station Madurai District. 3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. am Crl.O.P.(MD)No.16261 of 2011 19.12.2011 TR : 03.01.2012: 2p/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/