Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

CHRISTY MOSES versus THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

High Court of Madras

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Christy Moses v. The Commissioner of Police - CRL.O.P.(MD)No.3983 OF 2007 [2007] RD-TN 2261 (11 July 2007)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 11/07/2007

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA

CRL.O.P.(MD)No.3983 OF 2007

Christy Moses ... Petitioner

Vs.

The Commissioner of Police,

Office of the Commissioner of Police,

Madurai. ... Respondent

Prayer

Petition filed under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code praying to direct the respondent herein to take necessary action on the petitioner's complaint dated 16.04.2007 against the above said persons and register a case. For Petitioner .. Mr.S.Balasubramanian

For Respondent .. Mr.P.Rajendran

Govt.Advocate(Crl.side)

:ORDER



This petition has been filed to direct the Commissioner of Police to take necessary action based on the petitioner's complaint dated 16.04.2007.

2.Heard both sides.

3. A re'sume' of facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this petition would run thus:

(i) The gist and kernel, the nitty-gritty of the grievance of the petitioner would run thus:

Mathew Moses is an advocate practicing in Madurai and his wife is Christy Moses. Mathew Moses is the land lord of the building bearing Door No.48, P.T.Rajan Road, Madurai and the said premises was leased out to one Jenath Begam for non-residential purpose, wherein she made some decorations for running the shop. Her son is Usuf Ali. It so happened that the Christy Moses and Mathew Moses requested Jenath Begam to vacate the premises, for which, Jenath Begam and her son demanded back the advance amount and also they wanted whatever amount they have spent for decorating the premises for running their shop by availing loan from the Bank. Upto this, there is no controversy in narrating the facts by all the parties to the proceedings.

(ii) On the one hand, Usuf Ali would contend that Christy Moses agreed to repay the premium along with the amount which they spent for decorating the premises, but she turned turtle and thereupon alone, he lodged a complaint with the police as against her that she virtually cheated him and his mother purely for the purpose of taking delivery of possession without paying the amount as agreed. The Police registered the case in Cr.No.36/2007. (iii) It is the grievance of the petitioner that some police officers joining hands with Usuf Ali dragged Christy Moses to the Central Crime Branch and compelled her to sign some papers in order to derive undue benefit. According to petitioner, such an act perpetrated by the Inspector of Police, Periakaruppan, and Head Constable Prabhakaran, only at the bequest of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Mohamed Hanifa and the Police Legal Adviser, Chandra Praha. Thereupon, the petitioner, Christy Moses lodged a complaint dated 16.04.2007 with the Commissioner of Police, Madurai for taking action against the police officers concerned. Since no action has been taken, this petition has been filed for taking action on that complaint.

4. Heard Mr.S.Balasubramanian, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Ajmal Khan, the learned counsel for the intervener and Mr.P.Rajendran, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side).

5. The Inspector General of Police has filed a counter denying and refuting, gainsaying and contradicting all the allegations found set out in the petition as well as in the said complaint.

6. At the outset itself, I would like to point out that this is a dispute which arose out of some misunderstanding between the landlord and the tenant. The police registered the case in Cr.No.36/2007 after getting advice from the legal adviser Chandra Prabha who happened to be the legal adviser in the Office of the Commissioner of Police and such legal opinion was obtained only on being referred to by Deputy Commissioner of Police, Mohamed Hanifa.

7. In my opinion, the said legal adviser-Chandra Adviser is enjoying some immunity in the sense that she should be equated to the level of an advocate for the police. Whenever a dispute between the parties arises, the parties should confine it between themselves and it is better not for them to peer further as to who gave legal advice to the rival party. It is common knowledge that an adviser is having certain ostensible powers. It might even be a wrong advice or correct advice, but it should not be an illegal advice attracting the adviser as one aggressor before the fact. Imputing that a particular person gave an illegal advice beyond the scope of this enquiry and rightly or wrongly in her wisdom, she thought it fit to advice the police in registering the case in Cr.No.36/07. As against such advice, the petitioner cannot raise her accusative finger and she cannot pray for taking any official or departmental action as against Chandra Prabha. With this observation, I would like to close this matter as against Chandra Prabha.

8. Relating to the role of Mohamed Hanifa, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, the learned counsel Mr.Ajmal Khan would submit that he simply forwarded the complaint for obtaining legal advice, so submitting, he would rightly raise a query as to what sin he had committed in getting the legal advice. The Deputy Commissioner of Police in this case has not apparently acted in any illegal manner and as such as against him also, this matter could be closed.

9. The allegation in the complaint dated 16.04.2007 is against the Inspector of Police, Periya Karuppan and the Head Constable-Prabhakaran. The complaint would read thus:

"27.03.2005 k; njjpad;W fhiy Rkhh; 9 kzpf;F kJiu khefuk;> kj;jpa Fw;wg;gphptpy; Vl;lhf gzpg[hpe;J tUk; jpU.gpughfud; vd;gth; vq;fs; tPl;ow;F te;J cq;fs; kPJk; cq;fs; fzth; kPJk; a{Rg; mypp vd;gth; g[fhh; bfhLj;Js;shh;. vdnt ePq;fs; ,UtUk; khiy 6 kzpf;F kj;jpa Fw;wg;gphptpy; te;J Muhf ntz;Lk; vd;W Twpdhh;. mjw;fhd rk;kd; vq;nf vd;W nfl;ljw;F blg[o fkpcodh; jpU.KfkJ cwdpgh> kw;Wk; fkpco;dhpd; yPfy; ml;itrUk; F.I.R nghl brhy;y cj;jut[ nghl;Ls;shh;fs;. Vdnt rk;kd; bfhz;L tutpy;iy vd;W Twpr; brd;whh;. khiy 6 kzpf;F vd; fztUk; ml;tnfl; rpjk;guehjd; vd;gtUk; kj;jpa Fw;wg;gphptw;F brd;wdh;. mg;bghGJ ,d;];bgf;lh; bghpafUg;gd; ml;tnfl; rpjk;guehjid btspna nghq;fs; vd;W mDg;gptpl;L vd; fzthplk; ePq;fs; cq;fs; kidtpia ehis fhiy kj;jpa Fw;wg;gphpt[ mYtryfj;jpw;F miHj;J tuhtpl;lhy; ehq;fs; cq;fs; tPl;ow;F te;J mrpq;fg;gLj;jp miHj;J tu ntz;oaJ ,Uf;Fk;. blg[o fkpco;dh; jpU.KfkJ cwdpgh> kw;Wk; fkpco;dhpd; yPfy; ml;itrh; jpUkjp. Re;jpug;gpughtpd; cj;jut[ vd;W Twp mDg;gptpllhh;. .....

... fhh;g;gnu\d; tq;fp Fykq;fyk; gphptpy; lhf;Fbkz;Lfis nkhroahf jahhpj;J fld; thq;fp fl;lhky; tpl;oUe;j nyhd; bjhifia jd; gjtpia gad;gLj;jp fhty;Jiw mjpfhhpfistpl;L 27.03.2007 Kjy; 4.4.2007 tiu vd;id kpul;o jpU.a{Rg; myp nkhroahf tq;fpapy; bgw;w nyhd; bjhifia Vw;Wf;bfhs;Sk;go jdf;F fPH; gzpg[hpa[k; mjpfhhpfis tpl;L vd;dplk; vGjp thq;fp blg[o fk\;zh; jpU.KfkJ +dpgh kPJk; Jiw hPjpahd eltof;if vLf;Fk;go nfl;Lf; bfhs;fpnwd;."

10. The relevant portion in the petition filed by Christy Moses, is extracted hereunder for ready reference:

"... Sri.Periakaruppan, Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch and Sri.Prabhakaran, Head Constable, Central Crime Branch, committed heinous offence by making phone calls and threatening the petitioner and making her to go over to the Central Crime Branch clandestinely without any summons and compelling her give a letter on 28.03.2007."

11. A mere perusal of the complaint would demonstrate that according to the complainant, the Inspector and the Head Constable concerned have committed allegedly the illegal act of compelling Christy Moses to execute certain documents and/or to sign some documents. The complainant who is the petitioner cannot be sent out of the Court as though her narration of facts cannot be believed to have happened or it is a matter which cannot be probed into. Necessarily when there is a serious allegation made in a responsible and sober manner, naturally the Court should order for probe into it.

12. The learned counsel for the respondent would raise a query as to why over a complaint seeking for departmental action, there should be an application under Section 482 I.P.C at all and further add that there is no necessity at all to register any F.I.R, as against which the learned counsel for the petitioner fittingly and convincingly submit that this Court while exercising its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C, once comes across certain allegations of perpetration of criminal offence, the Court could order for departmental action and at the same time, direct to register a case also and that thereupon the matter could be investigated into.

13. In my opinion, the counter filed, does not disclose as to what sort of enquiry had been conducted, whether Christy Moses was examined; whether any attempt was made to search for the documents allegedly compelled to be executed by her and whether those documents were put into execution etc.

14. Hence, in these circumstances, I would like to direct the Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai to take up the matter and look into the complaint and make a thorough probe into it after giving due opportunity to the petitioner and her witnesses. He is also duty bound to examine the police officers concerned and arrive at an objective conclusion as observed supra and if illegality is found out, necessary and if any cognizable offence is found committed, then the F.I.R may be registered also. He shall complete the process of probe within a period two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

15. With the above direction, this petition is disposed of. To

1.The Commissioner of Police,

Office of the Commissioner of Police,

Madurai.

2.The Public Prosecutor,

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

Madurai.




Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.