Madras High Court
WP CRL.(MD)/5250/2026 of R.Chandrasekaran Vs The State of Tamil Nadu rep on 17 September 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 17.09.2026
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE P.MURUGAN
WP Crl.(MD) NO. 5250 of
{CNR: HCMD011253632026}
Case QR
R.Chandrasekran
... Petitioner
.Vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu rep by
The Superintendent of Police
O/o.The Superintendent of Police
Surveyor Coloney
K.Pudur
Madurai - 625 007.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police (UNIT - I)
District Crime Branch,
Madurai.
3. The Inspector of Police, (UNIT-I)
District Crime Branch
Madurai.
... Respondents
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to take appropriate legal action in the petitioner complaint dt.12.07.2024 and 17.03.2025 based on the report of the 3rd Respondent dt.18.02.2025 within a time frame fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Muthukkannan
For Respondents : Mr.D.Rajaboopathy
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to take appropriate legal action in the petitioner complaint dt. 12.07.2024 and 17.03.2025 based on the report of the 3rd Respondent dt. 18.02.2025 within a time frame fixed by this Court.
2. Mr.D.Rajaboopathy, learned Government Advocate, (Crl. Side) takes notice for the respondents. Heard the counsel on either side and perused the records.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the rival party, namely, one Saravanan, had agreed to sell his property to the petitioner for a total sale consideration of Rs.34,00,000/-. However, contrary to the agreement, the said Saravanan sold the property to a third party. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner lodged a complaint of cheating with the respondent police.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in an earlier proceeding in Crl. O.P.(MD) No. 11315 of 2025 filed by the rival party, the police status report indicated that the rival party had cheated the petitioner. The learned counsel further contends that once such a finding was noted, it is the duty of the police to proceed further and conclude the enquiry on the petitioner's representation in accordance with the law.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submits that upon receiving the petitioner's complaint/representation, the respondent police initiated an enquiry and issued summons to the rival party; however, the rival party failed to appear. He further assures the Court that the respondent police will complete the inquiry and dispose of the petitioner's representation within a period of three (3) weeks.
6. Recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), the respondents police are directed to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation/complaint on merits and in accordance with the law, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of. 17.09.2026 TM To
1. The Superintendent of Police O/o.The Superintendent of Police Surveyor Coloney K.Pudur Madurai - 625 007.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police (UNIT - I) District Crime Branch, Madurai.
3. The Inspector of Police, (UNIT-I) District Crime Branch Madurai.
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
DR.P.MURUGAN, J., TM WP.Crl.(MD).No.5250 of 2026 17.09.2026