CRL OP No. 15157 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 16-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP No. 15157 of 2026 B.Janakiraman S/o.Balasubramani, No.12, Venkata Iyer Street, Mannady, Chennai-1. ..Petitioner(s) Vs State by Inspector of Police (Crime), N3, Muthaiyalpet Police Station, Royapuram, Chennai-1. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to direct the respondent to register the FIR in pursuant to the order in Crl.MP.No.8163 of 2025 dated 09.01.2026 by the learned XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George town, Madras and to file a final report and pass such further order or orders as this Honble court. For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.C.Manaoharan For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Amarnath Counsel for Government of Tamilnadu (Criminal Side) ORDER The petitioner lodged a complaint before the respondent–Police with regard to a chit fund transaction. Since no action was taken on the said complaint, the petitioner filed a private complaint before the learned XVI https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 15157 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai, seeking a direction to the respondent–Police to register an FIR, investigate the matter, and file a final report. 2. The learned XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai, by an order dated 09.01.2026, allowed the petition and directed the respondent– Police to conduct an enquiry and submit a report before the Court. According to the petitioner, even thereafter no action was taken by the respondent–Police. Therefore, the petitioner approached the learned XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai, by filing a petition under Section 199 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, alleging disobedience of the order passed by the Court. The learned XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai, returned the petition on the ground that no direction had been issued for registration of an FIR and that only a preliminary enquiry had been ordered. Hence, the petition was returned. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has filed the present Criminal Original Petition. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) produced a report submitted by the respondent–Police, stating that pursuant to the directions issued by the Court below, both the petitioner and the counter-petitioners were summoned for enquiry and appeared before the respondent on 06.02.2026. Their statements were recorded and, thereafter, a https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 15157 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 report was submitted before the Court below on 04.03.2026. 4. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 5. A perusal of the records reveals that the respondent–Police have completed the enquiry and filed a report before the Court below. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the said report, it is always open to him to file a protest petition before the jurisdictional Magistrate. In the event of such a petition being filed, the learned Magistrate shall consider the same, afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. 6. With the above observations and directions, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of. 16-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No JER To 1. The XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George town, Chennai. 2. The Inspector of Police (Crime), N3, Muthaiyalpet Police Station, Royapuram, Chennai-1. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 15157 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J. JER CRL O.P. No. 15157 of 2026 16-06-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis