Manikandan v. The Commissioner Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11-06-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

1. Manikandan

2. Lalitha

3. Bhavani Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Commissioner Office, Chennai.

2.The Inspector of Police, AWPS-Guindy Police Station, Chennai.

Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS Act, to direct the 2nd respondent that not to harass the petitioner except due process of law.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.K.Karuppaiyamooppanar For Respondent(s):

Mr.A.Amarnath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent police not to harass the petitioners except by following due process of law.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent police had called the petitioners for enquiry on 21.05.2026. The petitioners have appeared before the respondent police and submitted their statements, stating that the de facto complainant namely, Parimalam has lodged a false complaint, alleging that the marriage engagement between the 1st petitioner and Pavithra was delayed on account of dowry harassment. It was further stated that certain information created doubts regarding the conduct of Pavithra, and in order to ascertain the veracity of the same, the marriage was postponed.

3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that, a false complaint has been lodged against the petitioners. Though the petitioners have already appeared before the respondent police and submitted their explanations, they are being repeatedly called for enquiry without any justification. Hence, the present petition has been filed, seeking appropriate directions.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondents submitted that, based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant, Parimalam, a CSR was registered and an enquiry was conducted. During the course of enquiry, it was found that the delay in the marriage was attributable to a demand for dowry. Therefore, the complaint was forwarded to the District Social Welfare Officer for further action. As on date, no enquiry is pending with the 2nd respondent police.

5. Recording the aforesaid submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of. 11-06-2026 Jd To

1. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Commissioner Office, Chennai.

2.The Inspector of Police, AWPS-Guindy Police Station, Chennai.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.

jd 11-06-2026