V P KALAIRAJAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who was a sitting MLA at the relevant time representing T.Nagar Legislative Assembly constituency, has filed the present writ petition seeking for a direction to respondents 1 to 6 to transfer the criminal case registered by the fifth respondent Inspector of Police, Orathanadu Police Station, Thajavur District in Crime No.137 of 2007 to the 7th respondent CBI and further to direct the 7th respondent to investigate the case within the time frame.

(2.) WHEN the matter came up for admission on 6.3.2008, notice was ordered to the respondents. The third respondent has filed a counter affidavit, dated Nil.

(3.) THIS court also summoned the case diary to satisfy itself as to whether any worthwhile investigation was conducted. But it transpires that subsequent to the recording of statements under Section 161(3) Cr.P.C. and preparation of the sketch of the area in question, no further steps were taken except recording that necessary constables were posted for getting further details. Subsequently on 09.12.2007 (even before filing the writ petition), it was recorded that the accused will be identified very soon and he will get wound certificate from witnesses 1 and 3 and they will be submitted. Subsequent to these developments and after the receipt of the letter from the petitioner, the Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District, i.e., the third respondent by a letter dated 29.02.2008 had requested remarks of the fourth respondent as to whether he is recommending transfer of the case to CBCID or CBI. For this query, a report was sent by the Inspector of Police, fifth respondent, dated 14.3.2008 stating that appropriate steps have been taken to apprehend the accused and that there was no necessity to transfer the case to the CBCID. Thereafter, the only entry in the file was the information sent by the third respondent to the second respondent Director General of Police informing the pendency of the writ petition.