Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 56563 (MAD)

Uma v. The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police

CRL OP/19571/2026 · 2026-07-23

D Bharatha Chakravarthy

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP No. 19571 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL OP No. 19571 of 2026 1.Uma 2.Suganthi ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1.The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Thirumullaivoyal Police Station, Thirumullaivoyal Chennai 600062. Crime No.129 of 2026 2.V.Ragavi ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, praying to call for the records in connection with the FIR in Crime No.129 of 2026 dated 06.06.2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Thirumullaivoyal, Chennai and quash the same as against the petitioners/accused. For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Chinnasamy For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran, Government Advocate (Crl. Side), For R1 __________ Page1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 19571 of 2026 ORDER The prayer in the Criminal Original Petition is to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.129 of 2026 dated 06.06.2026. 2. On a perusal of the allegations contained in the First Information Report, it is alleged that the de facto complainant was lured by the accused that they will get her a job in YES Bank and made her to part away a sum of Rs.47,00,000/-. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the entire case is false, more specifically with reference to the accused Nos.2 and 3, there is no material at all, just because they happened to be family members of the accused No.1, they were falsely implicated in this case. 4. When allegations pointing towards the involvement of the accused Nos.2 and 3 is also made by the de facto complainant at the time of the making complaint, the Investigating Officer cannot pronounce upon the allegations at the stage of registering of the case itself. Therefore, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners are factual in nature, which will turn out only during the investigation and keeping open the liberty to the petitioners to __________ Page2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 19571 of 2026 point out any facts to the Investigating Officer when they choose to and raise all the grounds after the final report is filed. The investigation at the initial stage cannot be interfered, as such, the petition stands disposed of. 23-07-2026 Neutral Citation: No PVS To 1.The Inspector of Police Thirumullaivoyal Police Station, Chennai. Crime No.129 of 2026 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras __________ Page3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 19571 of 2026 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. PVS CRL OP No. 19571 of 2026 23-07-2026 __________ Page4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis