P PERIYANNAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition is filed to direct the first respondent herein to transfer the investigation in Cr.No. 229 of 2016 dated 04.10.2016 from the file of the second respondent herein to any other competent officer.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that on 22.09.2016, he went to Trichy to attend a temple function with his family members and when he returned to home, he found some one barged into his house, opened the alamirah and had stolen 4 sovereigns of gold chain and 4.1 grams of gold ear stud. It is submitted by the petitioner that he gave a complaint before the second respondent on 30.09.2016. It is further submitted by the petitioner that the second respondent, instead of registering the petitioner's complaint, on 02.10.2016, directed the petitioner to put his signature in an empty blank paper and directed him to appear before them, for enquiry, on some other day. In connection with the complaint, it is admitted that one Vanaraj was arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

(3.) The petitioner also produced before this Court, a representation (not dated) wherein, he referred to the description of missing jewels as a gold chain weighing of 4 sovereigns and one Jhimkhi weighing of sovereign and one nose stud. The learned Counsel for the petitioner also referred to another representation, which was received on 04.10.2016, wherein, the description of missing of jewels was given as two gold ear studs weighing of 4.100 grams and another chain weighing of 10.200 grams. It is stated that the First Information Report was registered as per the second representation, which was not given by the petitioner. The learned Counsel for the petitioner on earlier occasion, when the matter was heard, submitted that the complaint lodged by the petitioner has been manipulated to suit the convenience of the second respondent and that therefore it is a fit case that the investigation shall be transferred from the second respondent to some other officer. Having regard to the serious allegations that were made against the second respondent, this Court directed the first respondent to hold an enquiry and submit a report regarding the discrepancies with regard to the statement alleged to have been given by the petitioner and the information found in the First Information Report on or before 08.10.2017.