Bala@Balakrishnan v. The Commissioner Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.03.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Bala @ Balakrishnan ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner of Police, O/o. The Commissioner of Police, Coimbatore City.

2.The Deputy Commissioner of Police, O/o. The commissioner of Police, Coimbatore City.

3.The Inspector of Police, E-3, Saravanampatti Police Station, Coimbatore District.

... Respondents PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.17/Mugaam/Ka.Aa/Ko.Maa/2025 dated 13.01.2025 and quash the same as illegal.

For Petitioner : Mr. P. Narayana Prasadh For Respondents : Mr. R. Vinoth Raja, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings in Na. Ka. No. 17 / Mugaam / Ka. Aa / Ko. Maa/2025 dated 13.01.2025, thereby the petitioner not to enter into the city of Coimbatore.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is now facing trial in S.C.No.14 of 2021 on the file of the IV Additional District Court, Coimbatore. If the petitioner violated the order passed by the first respondent, he will be convicted under Section 51(a)(6)(1a) of the Madras City Police Act, 1888.

3. On perusal of the counter filed by the first respondent revealed that the petitioner is the resident of Coimbatore and he is a history sheeted having History Sheet No.6 of 2015. The petitioner is creating fear in the minds of the general public in the Coimbatore city. Therefore, the petitioner was served notice to appear before the second respondent. However, the petitioner after receipt of the said notice, failed to appear before the second respondent for enquiry. Therefore, the first respondent on receipt of the report from the second

respondent passed order on 13.01.2025 under Section 51A of the Madras City Police Act, 1888 require him to move himself outside Coimbatore.

4. Therefore, this Court finds no infirmity in the order passed by the first respondent. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.

5. However, the petitioner is permitted to enter into the city of Coimbatore to attend the enquiry by enabling the police and to attend the trial before the trial Court in Coimbatore.

21.03.2025 Index:Yes/No AT To 1.The Commissioner of Police, O/o. The Commissioner of Police, Coimbatore City. 2.The Deputy Commissioner of Police, O/o. The commissioner of Police, Coimbatore City. 3.The Inspector of Police, E-3, Saravanampatti Police Station, Coimbatore District.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J, AT 21.03.2025