K.Ramalingam v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26-03-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

1. K.Ramalingam

2. Ramesh

3. Thamizselvi Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.

2.The State rep by, The Inspector of Police Harur Police Station, Harur Taluk, Dharmapuri District.

Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to direct the respondents police or his subordinates not to harass the petitioners under the guise of the enquiry on the basis of false complaint lodged by the said Mr.Sankar and pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.P.Muthusamy For Respondent(s):

Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, seeking direction to the respondent police or his subordinates not to harass the petitioners under the guise of the enquiry on the basis of false complaint lodged by the said Mr.Sankar.

2. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the respondent police under the guise of enquiry on the complaint lodged by Mr.Sankar, have frequently called the petitioners for enquiry, thereby causing harassment. Further, he submitted that despite the civil suit being pending and the complaint being false, the 2nd respondent is continuing to harass the petitioners. Hence, the present petition.

3. Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submitted that the counter complainant is none other than the father of the first petitioner. The first petitioner and others are alleged to have assaulted their father on account of property dispute. It is an admitted position that all of them are residing in the same premises. Further, it is submitted that yet another complaint was made by one of the sons. In order to avoid further clashes and to ensure peace and safety

of men and materials, the respondent police are conducting an enquiry and the petitioners were called only for enquiry and not harassed.

4. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

5. Since the petitioners have submitted that there is a civil dispute, it is for the petitioners to submit the relevant documents and also give an undertaking that they will not cause any injuries either to each other or to the rival groups.

6. In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel on either side and also taking into account the facts and circumstance of the case, this Court is of the view that the act of the respondent police cannot be termed as harassment. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 26-03-2026 Jd Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.

2.The State rep by, The Inspector of Police Harur Police Station, Harur Taluk, Dharmapuri District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.

jd 26-03-2026