← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/5081/2019disposed of

V.Munisamy v. The Commissioner Of Police

2019-04-04Honourable Mr Justice N. Seshasayee3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.04.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE Crl.O.P.(MD)No.5081 of 2019 V.Munisamy ... Petitioner /Vs./ 1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai District.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai, Madurai District.

3.The Superintendent of Police, Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District.

4.The Inspector of Police, B-3, Teppakulam Police Station [Crime], Madurai City, Madurai.

5.The Inspector of Police, Adiyamankottai Polcie Station, Dharmapuri District.

6.Mr.Paulsamy 7.R.Rajam

...Respondents

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to direct the respondents 1 and 4 not to harass the petitioner and petitioner family members.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ilaya Perumal For R-1 to R-5 : Mr.V.Neelakandan Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petitioner claims that he is being harassed by the fourth respondent at the instance of the respondents 6 and 7.

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

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondents 6 and 7 have entered into a contract for supply of granite stones from Andhrapradesh. Transaction has been settled. On an earlier occasion, the petitioner had moved the Principal Bench of this Court in Crl.O.P.No.29063 of 2013, wherein

the Principal Bench of this Court considered the petitioner's statement that the amount due to the private respondents has been settled and directed the fifth respondent not to harass him. On an identical allegation, now the respondents 4 and 5 have renewed their harassment.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the complaint preferred by the sixth respondent is pending enquiry and added that the seventh respondent had moved the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai with a private complaint in Crl.M.P.No.1101 of 2019. The respondent police have neither harassed the petitioner nor intended to harass him.

5. The Statement of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor is recorded. Unless whatever complaint that is pending with the fourth respondent discloses the commission of any cognizable offence, he shall not step in. if however, cognizable offence is disclosed and the fourth respondent is keen to hold any preliminary enquiry / interrogation, the same shall be done on summons under Section 41 A Cr.P.C. There shall not be any harassment whatsoever.

6. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) sm To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Madurai.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai District.

3.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai, Madurai District.

4.The Superintendent of Police, Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District.

5.The Inspector of Police, B-3, Teppakulam Police Station [Crime], Madurai City, Madurai.

6.The Inspector of Police, Adiyamankottai Polcie Station, Dharmapuri District.

7.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1CC TO MR.ILLAYAPERUMAL, Advocate Sr. No.59690 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.5081 of 2019 04.04.2019 NR(CO) TR (30.04.2019) 3P 9C