V SELVARAJ Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the de-facto complainant to direct the second respondent to transfer the investigation in Crime No.639 of 2017 from the file of the fifth respondent to fourth respondent under the supervision of the first respondent and to file a final report.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner's sister namely Muthammal got married to one Nagaraj and living in the same Village. Since there was a property dispute, both the family are not in talking terms and that being so, the son of the petitioner's, sister namely, Praveenkumar, proposed his love to the petitioner's second daughter Nishalini and the same was refused by her and she also informed the said fact to the petitioner and his son Vignesh. With regard to the said issue the petitioner's son Vignesh made a complaint before the Village headmen on 28.11.2017 and thereupon, a panchayat was convened, wherein the Village headmen asked Preveenkumar's family members to seek apology with the petitioner's daughter and also warned the said Praveenkumar not to indulge in such kind of activities. On 01.12.2017 at about 09.30 a.m., the petitioner went to attend the Village meeting and at that time, the petitioner's son Vignesh was present lonely in the petitioner's house and the petitioner returned back to his house at 12.30 p.m., and opened the door and he was shocked to see that his son Vignesh was found dead by hanging and immediately the petitioner had lodged a complaint before the fifth respondent and on that basis, the fifth respondent has registered a case in Crime No. 639 of 2017 under Section 174 of Cr.P.C.

(3.) Even though, the petitioner has stated in his complaint that the said Praveenkumar and his family members should have assaulted the petitioner's son and hanged him to death, the fifth respondent has purposely registered a case under Section 174 of Cr.P.C., with a view to help the accused persons to escape from the clutches of law. Hence, the petitioner and the Village people made a road roko and a complaint was also lodged before the second respondent on 04.12.2017. Immediately the second respondent directed the third respondent to investigate the matter and filed a correct report, but unmindful of the said direction, the third respondent simply based on the postmortem report, came to the conclusion that it is a case of suicide. The petitioner has also issued a legal notice to the third respondent on 12.12.2017 and even thereafter, the third respondent is colluding with the accused persons and safeguarding them and so far, no person was arrested and there is no progress in the investigation. The petitioner has also sent a complaint to the District Collector, Ramanathapuram District on 04.12.2017 and 15.12.2017 and also to the higher authorities, but even thereafter no proper action has been taken and hence, he requests this Court to direct the second respondent to transfer the investigation in Crime No.639 of 2017 from the file of the fifth respondent to fourth respondent and he also requests this Court to direct the first respondent to supervise the investigation.