← Library
Madras High CourtWP Crl./499/2026dismissed

Sai Sarvesh v. The Commissioner Of Police,

2026-03-25Honourable Mr Justice M. Nirmal Kumar6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Sai Sarvesh ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police Commissioner Office, EVK Sambath Road, Vepery, Chennai-600007.

2.Mr.Bennos, The Inspector of Police, K6-TP.Chathiram Police Station, Chennai.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition Criminal is filed under Section 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to conduct enquiry and initiate appropriate action against the 2nd respondent on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 22.02.2026.

For Petitioner :

Mr.G.Jeremiah For R1 :

Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Ms.Harshana.T Page No.1 of 6

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 1st respondent to conduct enquiry and initiate appropriate action against the 2nd respondent on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 22.02.2026. 2.Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not having a good relationship with his father who is a retired Additional Superintendent of Police and his father using his influence and contacts, has been foisting one case or other against the petitioner. The petitioner was dragged to the Police Station using force and he was also brutally beaten by the 2nd respondent. Hence, he gave a representation dated 22.02.2026 against the 2nd respondent Police, but no action taken. 3.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st respondent submitted that the petitioner, his father, mother and unmarried sister are residing in the same house. On 18.02.2026, the petitioner forced his father and unmarried sister out of the house leaving them standing on the road. On receiving a 100 emergency call, the Police on night duty went to the spot and requested the petitioner not to chase away elderly person and his unmarried sister onto the street, and ensured that they were allowed to Page No.

stay inside the house. The petitioner allowed his unmarried sister inside the house but his father chased out. For the incident on 18.02.2026, C.S.R.No.57 of 2026 registered, enquiry was pending. Based on which, summon issued to the petitioner for his appearance on 21.02.2026. Enraged over the same, when the petitioner's sister came back from the duty, the petitioner questioned her in the road and also beaten her. The passers-by informed the police, and the petitioner's father also came to the spot. The petitioner's sister swooned and was taken to the hospital. Based on information received from the hospital, an FIR was registered in Crime No.69 of 2026 against the petitioner for offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(2), 351(3) BNS and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002.

Now the petitioner projected a case that the Police entered into the house, assaulted and forcibly dragged him out. 4.At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even the petitioner has got a pendrive to show how he was forcibly handled and has photographs to show how the Police trying to pull the petitioner. 5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the above contention stating that the petitioner has been acting in an inhumane manner Page No.

with the intention of squatting over the property and is not allowing his retired father to sell the property for the marriage of his daughter. The petitioner has been using force to chase away his unmarried sister and retired father from the house. Subsequently, when the 2nd respondent Police took him to the Police Station for his violent acts, the petitioner's brother-in-law, sister, and even his father came there and requested the Police not to take further action, considering that it was a family dispute that escalated into a physical altercation, and the Police let the petitioner off. Such being the position, the petitioner has taken a different stand and is making wild allegations against the 2nd respondent Police. 6.

Considering the submissions and on perusal of the materials, it is seen that the petitioner is an accused in Crime No.69 of 2026 for offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(2), 351(3) BNS and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. Further, the petitioner's father, a retired Additional Superintendent of Police, needs to sell the property to arrange the marriage of his unmarried daughter, who is of advanced age.

Page No.4 of 6

7.In view of the above facts, this Court finds that the petitioner's allegation against the 2nd respondent Police is not sustainable. This Court does not find any merit consideration in this petition. 8.Accordingly, this Writ Petition Criminal stands dismissed. No costs. 25.03.2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order vv2 To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police Commissioner Office, EVK Sambath Road, Vepery, Chennai-600007.

2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

Page No.5 of 6

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

vv2 25.03.2026 Page No.6 of 6