Madras High Court
WP CRL.(MD)/5030/2026 of Arulanandhu Vs The State of Tamilnadu on 16 September 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 16.09.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE P. MURUGAN
WP Crl.(MD) NO. 5030 of
{CNR: HCMD011245752026}
Case QR
Arulanandhu
... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Ramanathapuram District,
Ramanathapuram.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Paramakudi Taluk Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District.
...Respondents
PRAYER :- Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of petitioner's representation/complaint dated 07.08.2026 in accordance with law within a time frame fixed by this Court and for other reliefs and to pass such other orders as this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr. S. Pradeep
For Respondents : Mr. C.Susikumar
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.
O R D E R
Heard both sides.
2. This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent to consider and dispose of petitioner's representation/complaint dated 07.08.2026 in accordance with law within a time frame fixed by this Court.
3. As per the earlier orders of this Court dated 07.09.2026, Mr.M.Raj Kumar, who is the Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Taluk Police Station, Ramanathapuram District, appeared before this Court. After enquiry, he submitted that the petitioner's complaint was received from the Superintendent of Police, it is in a current paper, and after conducting prima facie enquiry with the petitioner and rival party, namely, Mr.Mickale, it was found that the Government seal of the Tahsildar has been forged.
4. The petitioner has also sought cancellation of the Sale Deed based on the illegal or forged certificate. Since the police have no power to cancel the Sale Deed, the Inspector of Police kept quite. The Inspector of Police closed the enquiry even though prima facie on the enquiry made by the police with the petitioner and the rival party, came to know that the rival party has created forged the seal of the Government. It is mandatory on the part of the police officer to proceed with an enquiry, registration of a case and followed by investigation etc. Having closed the complaint, the party approached this Court. Closing the complaint, even after a prima facie case is made out that the rival party had forged the Government seal, cannot be accepted.
5. Now the Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Taluk Police Station, Ramanathapuram District, submitted that he would reopen the closed file, and conduct an enquiry with the petitioner as well as the rival party and also the concerned officers whose signatures are found in the illegal certificate.
6. In view of the above, the second respondent is directed to proceed further in accordance with law and take a better decision and complete the enquiry within a period of two [2] weeks from today.
7. Recording the above submissions, this writ petition is disposed of.
16.09.2026 Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No psa To
1. The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.
2. The Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Taluk Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
DR. P. MURUGAN, J. psa
WP.CRL.(MD). No.5030 of 2026
16.09.2026