Madras High Court
WP CRL.(MD)/5018/2026 of Esakkiyappa Manickaraja Vs The Superintendent of Police on 7 September 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 07.09.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE P. MURUGAN
WP.CRL.(MD). No.5018 of 2026
Esakkiyappa Manickaraja
... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Tirunelveli District,
Tirunelveli.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
O/o. the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Valliyoor Police Station,
Valliyoor,
Tiruelveli 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 the petitioner representation dated 28.06.2026 within the time limit stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr. S.Palanivelayutham
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.
O R D E R
Heard both sides.
2. The writ petition has been filed to direct the 2nd Respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.06.2026 within the time limit stipulated by this Court.
3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) takes notice for R1 to R3. He further submitted that the petitioner's representation dated 28.06.2026 was received by the third respondent on 10.07.2026 and CSR No.730 of 2026 was issued on 12.07.2026. After conducting an enquiry, the complaint was originally closed and the closed report was submitted to the second respondent. However, on the direction of the second respondent, namely, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, the enquiry has been reopened and the petition is pending for further enquiry.
4. The current paper was received by the third respondent on 10.07.2026, who conducted an enquiry and found no case made out and closed the same . The closure report was submitted to the petitioner at once. Then, the learned Government Advocate submitted that since the alleged offence is as per the complaint of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the second respondent, namely, the Deputy Superintendent of Police has to reopen and conduct further enquiry.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not received the closed report so far.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case since the alleged atrocities in the the compliant relates to the offences under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the third respondent is directed to reopen the enquiry and complete the same by examining the petitioner and the rival party and other witnesses necessary, and then form an opinion as to whether any offence is made out. If any offence is found to have been made out, the third respondent police shall proceed to register the FIR and follow the other procedure in accordance with law.
6. Recording the above submission of the learned Government Advocate, the third respondent is directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 28.06.2026, within a period of six weeks after examining the petitioner as well as the rival parties and take a better decision.
7. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of.
07.09.2026 Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No psa
To
1. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o. the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District.
3. The Inspector of Police, Valliyoor Police Station, Valliyoor, Tiruelveli District.
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
DR. P. MURUGAN, J. psa
WP.CRL.(MD). No.5018 of 2026
07.09.2026