Selvavelan vs Ramanathan

Court
Madras High Court

CRL RC(MD) No. 1763 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MURUGESAN
CRL RC(MD) No. 1763 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011537332026}
Selvavelan
..Petitioner
Vs
1. Ramanathan
2. Kanjana
3. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police,
Devipattinam
Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District.
4. The State of Tamilnadu, rep by The
Superintendent of Police
O/o.The Superintendent of Police,
Ramanathapuram.
..Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Revision filed under Section 438 r/w 442 BNSS, to
call for the records relating to the Impugned order dated 14.08.2026 in
Crl MP No.28/2026 on the file of the learned Additional Mahila Court
(Judicial Magistrate Court No.II), Ramanathapuram and set aside the
same as illegal and consequently direct the third respondent police to
register the FIR based on the complaint of the petitioner dated
06.07.2025.
For Petitioner :Mr.T. Veerakumar
__________
Page  1  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 11:37:32 am )

CRL RC(MD) No. 1763 of 2026
For R3 & R4 : Mrs.V.Moushica,
Counsel for State of TN(Crl.side)
ORDER
Heard and admitted.
02. With the consent of both parties, this criminal revision was
taken up for final hearing.
03. Challenging the order dated 14.08.2026 of the Judicial
Magistrate II (FAC), Additional Mahila Court, Ramanathapuram,
hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial court’, dismissing the criminal
miscellaneous petition filed by the revision petitioner under S.175(3)
BNSS in Crl MP No.28/2026, the revision petitioner has filed this
Criminal Revision Petition under S.438 BNSS.
04. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred
hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking in this
criminal revision, 'the revision petitioner' and 'the revision respondent',
unless the context otherwise requires.

__________
Page  2  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 11:37:32 am )

CRL RC(MD) No. 1763 of 2026
05. Prefatory facts are that the revision petitioner, before the trial
court, has filed a criminal miscellaneous petition under S.175(3) BNSS
in Crl MP No.28/2026 requiring the trial court ‘to register a case
against the revision respondents 1 and 2 under S.296(b), S.115(2),
S.118(2), S.351(3) BNS and S.4 TNPHW Act,’ and that the trial court,
after enquiry, has dismissed the criminal miscellaneous petition in Crl
MP No.28/2026 on the grounds
(a) that the revision petitioner did not lodge any complaint
before Devipattinam Police Station being the jurisdictional
police station, and
(b) that the revision petitioner did not file any document to show
he has sent a complaint to the Superintendent of Police,
Ramanathapuram District.
06. Challenging such dismissal of the trial court, the revision
petitioner has filed this criminal revision.
07. Heard both sides, and perused all the materials available.
08. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that
even though the revision petitioner has filed a copy of the complaint
given to Devipattinam Police Station and also a copy of the complaint
__________
Page  3  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 11:37:32 am )

CRL RC(MD) No. 1763 of 2026
sent to the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, the
trial court has erroneously held the revision petitioner has not filed
such copies and that therefore, the impugned order of the trial court is
erroneous and perverse, liable to be interfered with.

09. Learned counsel for State of TN(Crl.side) appearing for the
revision respondents 3 and 4 would fairly concede that the revision
petitioner has filed such copies as required by the trial court, along
with the criminal miscellaneous petition in Crl MP No.28/2026.
10. Point for determination is whether the revision petitioner is
entitled to get an order, allowing this criminal revision, setting aside
the impugned order of the trial court and granting any other suitable
directions?
11. Reasons stated by the trial court for dismissing the criminal
miscellaneous petition in Crl MP No.28/2026 are
(a) that the revision petitioner did not lodge any complaint
before Devipattinam Police Station, and
(b) that the revision petitioner did not file any document to show
he has sent a complaint to the Superintendent of Police,
Ramanathapuram District.
__________
Page  4  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 11:37:32 am )

CRL RC(MD) No. 1763 of 2026
12. It is unfortunate to note that even though the trial court, in
the list of documents in its order , has shown (1) the copy of the
complaint lodged by the revision petitioner with Devipattinam Police
Station, (2) the copy of the complaint sent by the revision petitioner to
the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, through
registered post and (3) the copy of a medical certificate, as the
documents relied on by the revision petitioner, the trial court has
simply dismissed the criminal miscellaneous petition in Crl MP
No.28/2026 with the findings that the revision petitioner did not lodge
any complaint before Devipattinam Police Station and that the revision
petitioner did not file any document to show he has sent a complaint to
the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District.

13. Therefore, it is clear that the trial court has passed the
impugned order without applying its judicial mind and that therefore,
the impugned order of the trial court is erroneous and perverse.
14. Before parting with, this court would like to point out that
since the revision petitioner, in his complaint/representation sent to the
Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, through registered
__________
Page  5  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 11:37:32 am )

CRL RC(MD) No. 1763 of 2026
post, has referred to his earlier complaint given to the jurisdictional
police station, proof for ‘lodging’ such complaint with the
jurisdictional police station need not necessarily be required.
15. Resultantly, this court holds that the revision petitioner is
entitled to get an order, allowing this criminal revision, setting aside
the impugned order of the trial court and granting direction in such

terms as detailed hereunder, and this point is answered, accordingly.
16. In fine, this criminal revision shall stand allowed,
(a) setting aside the impugned order of the trial court,
(b) remanding the criminal miscellaneous petition in Crl MP
No.28/2026 to the trial court for disposal in accordance with law, and
(c) directing the trial court to complete the aforesaid exercise
within 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
17. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.
11-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
GNS
__________
Page  6  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 11:37:32 am )

CRL RC(MD) No. 1763 of 2026
To
1.The Additional Mahila Court (Judicial Magistrate Court No.II),
Ramanathapuram
2.The Inspector Of Police, Devipattinam
Police Station
Ramanathapuram District
3. The Superintendent of Police
O/o.The Superintendent of Police
Ramanathapuram
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Madurai
__________
Page  7  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 11:37:32 am )

CRL RC(MD) No. 1763 of 2026
B.MURUGESAN, J.
GNS
CRL RC(MD) No. 1763 of 2026
11-11-2026
__________
Page  8  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 11:37:32 am )