P.Ramamurthy v. The Commissioner Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.03.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH W.P No.6715 of 2021 P.Ramamurthy, S/o.Padmanaban .. Petitioner vs.

1. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City Police, Vepery, Chennai-7.

2. The Inspector of Police, R 5, Choolaimedu Police Station Chennai-600 094.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.M.Balaji For Respondents : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Addl. Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondent police not to harass the petitioner under the guise of an enquiry.

2. The petitioner has already filed an anticipatory bail petition before this Court in Crl.O.P.No.2701 of 2021. When the matter was taken up for hearing, it was reported on the side of the police that there is no case or petition pending against the petitioner. Recording the same, the anticipatory bail petition was closed on 16.02.2021.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that even thereafter, on 17.02.2021, a retired police officer came along with an officer belonging to the second respondent police station for enquiry. The further grievance of the petitioner is that he and his wife are being harassed, based on the complaint given by Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Corporation.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that the second respondent reiterates the same position that there is no complaint or petition that is pending enquiry before the respondent police. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that no one from the second respondent police station had gone to the residence of the petitioner or called the petitioner. If the petitioner has any grievance against the retired police officer, who is engaged by the Finance Company, the petitioner has to independently proceed against him in the manner known to law. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor therefore submitted that the petitioner will not be called for any enquiry by the second respondent, since there is no complaint or petition pending against the petitioner.

5. In view of the specific stand taken by the second respondent and also recording the submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this writ petition is closed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar KAL To

1. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City Police, Vepery, Chennai-7.

2. The Inspector of Police, R 5, Choolaimedu Police Station Chennai-600 094.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

+1cc to Mr.K.M.Balaji, Advocate, S.R.No.16878 W.P No.6715 of 2021 PL(CO) TE(20/04/2021) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/