Madras HC orders TN police to compensate petitioner for filing lapse

Apprehending that there would not be a fair probe into her complaint, she moved the HC seeking transfer of investigation.
Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court
Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court (File photo | EPS)
Updated on
2 min read

MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court recently told the Tamil Nadu police department to pay Rs 10,000 to a petitioner who was forced to approach the court twice due to an “internal documentation lapse” committed by the Sindhupatti police in filing the final report in a criminal case last year.

The petitioner alleged that in August 2024, there was a scuffle between her, her husband and in-laws. Both parties lodged police complaints against each other but as her mother-in-law is a panchayat president, the Sindhupatti police delayed registering a case on her complaint till she petitioned the SP.

Apprehending that there would not be a fair probe into her complaint, she moved the HC seeking transfer of investigation. However, the petition was disposed of after the police informed the court that they already filed a final report in her case by closing her complaint as a ‘mistake of facts’. The police also added that they would soon be filing charge sheet against her in the case lodged by her in-laws.

When the petitioner, however, moved the lower court filing a protest petition against the above closure report, she was informed that no final report has been filed, prompting her to approach the HC again seeking transfer of probe. Upon being questioned by the court, Madurai SP replied that the final report was mistakenly presumed to have been filed due to an internal documentation lapse and miscommunication. The final report was later filed and departmental action was initiated against the official concerned, the SP added.

Hearing this, Justice B Pugalendhi observed that this indicates the lack of follow-up on part of the officials in ensuring that final reports are filed without delay. He also condemned the misrepresentation of facts before the court. Since the petitioner was needlessly driven to the court twice due, he directed the police to pay her Rs 10,000f or the mental agony she suffered and the litigation expenses.

Related Stories

No stories found.
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com