M.Periyasamy, v. Mr. Sagadevan And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11.06.2026

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA M.Periyasamy

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.

Mr.Sagadevan, The Inspector of Police, Karipatti Police Station, Salem District.

2.

Mr.Thenmozhivel, The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ammapettai Range, Salem.

...Respondents

Contempt petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, seeking to punish the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order dated 04.02.2026 passed by this Court in W.P.Crl.No.214 of 2026.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Deepakkumar For Respondents : Mr.M.M.I.Khaleel, GA(Crl. Side)

ORDER

This contempt petition has been filed seeking to punish the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order dated 04.02.2026 passed by this Court in W.P.Crl.No.214 of 2026.

1/4

2. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents submitted that this Court, vide order dated 04.02.2026 made in W.P.Crl.No.214 of 2026, disposed of the said writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 09.01.2026 seeking removal of his name from the History Sheet bearing H.S.No.352 of 2011, maintained by the 1st respondent herein, and to pass appropriate orders within a period of six weeks. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the respondents considered the petitioner's representation and consequently, the petitioner's name has been removed from the History Sheet.

3. Further, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) produced a copy of the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 14.03.2026 to substantiate compliance, whereby a request was made to the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders to close the History Sheet opened against the petitioner. He also submitted that while the order under contempt has been complied with, there was admittedly a delay and that the said delay was neither wilful nor wanton, but was occasioned solely due to administrative reasons, for which he tendered an 2/4

unconditional and sincere apology, praying that the respondents be purged of the contempt proceedings and the charges be dropped

4. Though there had been some delay in complying with the order of this Court, in view of the above submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and the sincere apology tendered by him, this Court finds it unnecessary to continue with the contempt proceedings against the respondents and accordingly, this contempt petition stands closed.

11.06.2026 skt 3/4

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

skt 11.06.2026 4/4