Tony Pravinkumar v. The Superintendent Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 06.09.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Tony Pravinkumar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.the Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore-641 001.

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, O/o.the Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore-641 001.

... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,/ 528 BNSS, 2023, pleased to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioners in the blanket of enquiry in SPGP No.3893/2024, C.No.400/SPGP/DCB/CUD/24.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi For Respondents : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner herein summoned by the respondent police under Section 179 and 94 of BNSS to appear before the Investigating Officer for enquiry on 30.08.2024. The petitioner is supposed to attend the 1/4

enquiry in view of the complaint given by one Sheik Dawood, who alleged that the amount of Rs.30,00,000/- was received by deceit saying that the petitioner and his family are in possession of iridium and he can make double the amount. However, the money was not paid or iridium given. Therefore, take action against the petitioner for cheating. 2.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that even according to the complaint, the money was paid in the year 2020 and a false complaint given criminal cloak to the civil transaction. In fact the petitioner and the defacto complainant are friends and having business transaction during the year 2019. To recover time barred debt, a new theory has been invented by the complainant, upon which, the police is investigated. Hence seeks to quash the undated summons for appearance on 30.08.2024.

3.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that on the complaint given by Sheik Dawood on 22.07.2024, this petitioner was summoned for appearance with documents, however, he has not appeared. Since the complaint has element of commission of cognizable offence, appropriate investigation is 2/4

required.

4.

On perusing the complaint, this Court finds that it is a matter for enquiry and prima facie concluded that the dispute between the defacto complainant and the petitioner is purely civil in nature. Therefore, it is appropriate for the petitioner herein to cooperate with the investigation and produce the documents to establish that he has received money from the defacto complainant's son for the purpose of business and not with any intention for selling iridium or cheat. 5.

Therefore, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner herein to participate in the enquiry on receipt of summons. The respondent police is also directed to issue summons and that summons should be issued well in advance to enable the petitioner herein to participate in the enquiry.

06.09.2024 Index : Yes/No rpl Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

rpl To 3/4

1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.the Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore-641 001.

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, O/o.the Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore-641 001.

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

06.09.2024 4/4