Madras High Court Allows Transfer of Investigation in Police Misconduct Case — Sub-Inspector Allegedly Demanded Free Dried Fish and Threatened Shop Owner. Court Directed Transfer of Investigation to Another Superintendent of Police Under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 to Ensure Fair Probe.

High Court: Madras High Court In Favour of Prosecution
  • 7
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, M. Kumar, filed a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeking transfer of investigation of his complaint dated 29.12.2025 from the 4th respondent (Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram) to another agency. The petitioner alleged that on 19.12.2025, the 6th respondent, a Sub-Inspector of Police at Pamban Police Station, purchased dried fish worth Rs.1,000 from his shop but did not pay. On 26.12.2025, the 6th respondent again visited the shop, demanded fish free of cost, and when the petitioner's brother refused, abused him and threatened to foist a false narcotic case. The petitioner lodged complaints to higher police authorities but no action was taken. The Government Advocate opposed the petition, arguing the allegations were baseless and that the 6th respondent was recently transferred. The Court, however, found that the allegations were serious and that investigation by the same department might not be impartial. The Court directed the 1st respondent (Director General of Police) to transfer the investigation to the Superintendent of Police of any other district within two weeks. The Court also suo motu impleaded the Special Executive Officer of Pamban Town Panchayat as the 7th respondent, noting that the shop was allegedly located on panchayat land without proper authorization, and directed the 7th respondent to take appropriate action regarding the unauthorized occupation.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Transfer of Investigation - Section 528 BNSS, 2023 - Fair Investigation - Petitioner alleged that the 6th respondent Sub-Inspector of Police demanded free dried fish and threatened to foist a false narcotic case - Court found that the complaint involved serious allegations against a police officer and that investigation by the same department may not inspire confidence - Held that transfer of investigation to another Superintendent of Police is necessary to ensure impartiality (Paras 2-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the investigation of a complaint against a police officer for alleged misconduct should be transferred to another agency to ensure a fair and impartial investigation.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Court allowed the petition and directed the 1st respondent to transfer the investigation to the Superintendent of Police of any other district within two weeks. The Court also directed the 7th respondent to take action regarding the unauthorized occupation of panchayat land by the petitioner's shop.

Law Points

  • Transfer of investigation
  • Section 528 BNSS
  • 2023
  • Police misconduct
  • Fair investigation
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026:MHC:996

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2791 of 2026

2026-02-11

L. Victoria Gowri

2026:MHC:996

Mr.S.Atham Ali, Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, Mr.T.Amjad Khan

M. Kumar

1. The Director General of Police, 2. The Inspector General of Police, 3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, 4. The Superintendent of Police, 5. State of Tamilnadu, 6. Atharsh, 7. The Special Executive Officer

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal original petition seeking transfer of investigation of a complaint against a police officer.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought direction to the 1st respondent to transfer investigation of his complaint dated 29.12.2025 from the 4th respondent to another agency.

Filing Reason

Alleged misconduct by the 6th respondent Sub-Inspector of Police in demanding free dried fish and threatening to foist a false case.

Issues

Whether the investigation of a complaint against a police officer should be transferred to ensure impartiality.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel submitted that the 6th respondent purchased dried fish worth Rs.1,000 on 19.12.2025 but did not pay, and on 26.12.2025 demanded free fish and threatened to foist a false narcotic case. Government Advocate contended that the allegations were baseless and the 6th respondent was recently transferred.

Ratio Decidendi

When serious allegations of misconduct are made against a police officer, investigation by the same department may not inspire confidence, and transfer of investigation to another agency is necessary to ensure a fair and impartial probe.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to direct the 1st respondent to pass suitable order for change of investigation of the petitioner's complaint dated 29.12.2025 from the file of the 4th respondent to some other agency within the period as stipulated by this Court. Hence, it is necessary to transfer the investigation to any other Superintendent of police of other districts.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a complaint on 29.12.2025 to respondents 1 to 5. No action was taken. The petitioner then filed Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2791 of 2026 under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 seeking transfer of investigation. The Court heard the matter on 11.02.2026 and passed the order.

Acts & Sections

  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: 528
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Gujarat High Court Quashes Detention Order Under PASA Act for Lack of Material Showing Disturbance to Public Order. Preventive detention under Section 3(2) of Gujarat Prevention of Anti-social Activities Act, 1985 set aside as mere registration of FI...
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Allows Transfer of Investigation in Police Misconduct Case — Sub-Inspector Allegedly Demanded Free Dried Fish and Threatened Shop Owner. Court Directed Transfer of Investigation to Another Superintendent of Police Under Section 52...