Babu v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27.10.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA Babu ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent of Police, Superintendent Office, Nagapattinam District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Manalmedu Police Station, Mayiladudurai.

...Respondents

Writ petition is filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first and Second Respondents not to harass the petitioner except due process of law by considering Petitioner representation dated 04.10.2021.

For petitioner : Mr.P.Dasarathan For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.A.Damodaran, Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking direction to the first and Second Respondents not to harass the petitioner except due process of law by 1/5

considering the representation of the petitioner dated 04.10.2021.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he is working as a teacher at a private school at Manalmedu Village, Mayiladudurai and residing at No.24/150, Periya Street, Athimaanapurushan, Mayiladudurai Taluk, Nagapattinam; to defame the reputation of the petitioner, some unknown persons in the village have made a false complaint against the petitioner. Except the above false case, no other case is pending against him till date. However, the respondent Police opened a history sheet and continuously harassing the petitioner every now and then. He is also summoned for enquiry under Section 110 of Cr.P.C., In this regard, the petitioner made a representation not to harass him and the same was not considered by the respondent Police. Hence, this Writ Petition.

3. Admittedly, the petitioner is a teacher by profession. Except the case which has been registered against him in the year 2018, no new case has been registered till date. Since the petitioner is a teacher, often calling him to appear for enquiry before the Police Station might cause embarrassment to him. At the same time, it is the duty of the respondent Police to maintain law 2/5

and order. It is the grievance of the petitioner that his representation has not been considered by the Police and he is being called to appear before the Police for enquiry under Section 110 Cr.P.C., proceedings.

4. In these circumstances, I feel it is appropriate to direct the respondent Police to consider the representation made by the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date or receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the above direction, the Writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

27.10.2022 vum Index:yes/No Speaking order / Non speaking order 3/5

4/5

R.N.MANJULA,J.

vum To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Superintendent Office, Nagapattinam District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Manalmedu Police Station, Mayiladudurai.

27.10.2022 5/5