S.Saravanan v. State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.11.2015

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH Crl.O.P.Nos.27007 and 27008 of 2015 S.Saravanan ... Petitioner in both Crl.O.Ps.

Vs

1. State by District Superintendent of Police, 2.State by The Inspector of Police, Thirupapuliyur Police Station, ... Respondents in both Crl.O.Ps.

Prayer in Crl.O.P.No.27007 of 2015 :

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to direct the respondent police to give protection to the petitioner herein to participate in the auctions held by banks. Prayer in Crl.O.P.No.27008 of 2015 :

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to direct the respondent police to register a case in respect of the petitioner's complaint dated 19.10.2015.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Ranjithkumar For Respondents :

Mr.C.Emalias, Addl.Public Prosecutor.

COMMON ORDER The petitioner has come forward with these two petitions, praying to give protection to him to participate in the auctions held by the banks and also to register a case based on the complaint dated 19.10.2015 given by him.

2. According to the petitioner, he is doing business by participating in the gold jewellery auctions conducted by the banks. On 11.09.2015, when he went to participate in gold jewellery auction held by Canara Bank Puthuchatiram Branch, he was prevented by one Prabakaran, Purushotama Naidu, Sundar and others who are belonging to Tamil Nadu All Gold Jewellery merchants Association amd threatened him that unless he becomes a member to their association, he would not be allowed to participate in the auctions. Therefore, the petitioner lodged a complaint dated 19.10.2015 against the above said persons and he also made a representation to provide him police protection to participate him in the auctions held by the banks. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite lodging the complaint, the respondent police have not taken any action till date, nor provided police protection. Hence the petitions.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that it is appropriate to direct the respondents police to conduct an enquiry on the complaint dated 19.10.2015 given by the petitioner, if enquiry was not conducted so far and proceed further in accordance with law, as early as possible. As regards providing protection, the respondents police is directed to consider the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law if the circumstances warranting to provide protection to the petitioner.

Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of. Sd/- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The District Superintendent of Police,

2. The Inspector of Police, Thirupapuliyur Police Station,

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai.

Crl.O.P.Nos.27007 and 27008 of 2015 kgk[co] srg 16/12/2015