Order on DVAC probe against then Thanjavur SP set aside by HC

Madurai: Madras high court has set aside an order passed by the Thanjavur principal sessions court directing the DVAC to register FIR against then Thanjavur superintendent of police Ashish Rawat based on the complaint filed by an advocate.

An advocate T S Karthikeyan had filed a complaint against Rawat before the principal sessions court stating that the latter had allegedly misused his official position and had cut and removed teak trees worth several crores for his personal benefit without obtaining any prior permission from the government or the forest department.

He also alleged that the SP misappropriated several crores of rupees from the account of the police welfare society and demolished the compound wall in the SP office and constructed a meeting hall without obtaining any prior permission. So, the advocate sought a direction to the DVAC to register an FIR and investigate his complaint.

In Feb 2026, the sessions court forwarded the complaint to the DVAC with a direction to register the FIR against the then SP and to file a final report. Challenging the order and connected proceedings, the DVAC and state had filed petitions before HC.

Justice B Pugalendhi observed that it is a settled law that the court cannot direct the registration of FIR and investigation in a mechanical manner under Section 175(3) of the BNSS. However, a perusal of the order reveals that the complaint as against an IPS officer has been entertained by the sessions judge in a casual manner under Section 175(3) of BNSS without even ascertaining the materials, if any, relied on by the complainant in his complaint.

Further, the statute also provides protection to the public servants under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 175(4) of the BNSS. Without ensuring compliance with any of the above provisions and hearing the public servant concerned, the sessions judge has passed the impugned order in a mechanical manner and allowed the application on the very first date of hearing, the judge observed.

Hence, the judge set aside the order passed by the principal sessions judge. The judge also quashed the connected proceeding to constitute a committee and delegate the powers to inspect the place of occurrence to the committee.