Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9022/2019disposed of

Dhillan @ Ganesan v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

2019-06-27Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.06.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN CRL.O.P.(MD).No.9022 of 2019 Dhillan @ Ganesan : Petitioner Vs.

1.The Sub Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Dindigul District.

2.R.Ramesh : Respondents PRAYER : Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to direct the first respondent not to harass the petitioner based on the guise of enquiry as per the summons U/s.161(1) & 91

(1) of Cr.PC dated 20.06.2019 since already a civil suit is pending.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sureshkumar For R-1 : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ******

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the first respondent not to harass the petitioner based on the guise of enquiry as per the summons issued under Sections 161(1) & 91(1) of Cr.PC dated 20.06.2019.

2.The grievance of the petitioner is that based on the complaint given by the second respondent, the first respondent Police has issued summons to the petitioner and also harrasing him. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has filed the present Criminal Original Petition.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner purchased the property in the year 2009 from one Pattanam. Thereafter, he sold the same to the third parties. After ten years, now the second respondent alleging that the petitioner created and fabricated documents of his property, gave a complaint before the first respondent. He would further submit that the first respondent Police is harassing him. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing,

Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent on instructions would submit that a complaint has been given by the second respondent alleging that the petitioner created some forged documents had sold the property to the third parties, with regard to which, on summons issued by the first respondent, the petitioner appeared before the first respondent for enquiry. He further added that the first respondent Police is not harassing the petitioner. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the enquiry is pending against the petitioner, this Court directs the petitioner to appear before the first respondent Police and co-operate with the enquiry and the first respondent is also directed not to harass the petitioner.

6.The Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of with the above observations.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) tsg To 1.The Sub Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Dindigul District.

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

+1cc to M/S. M.S.SURESH KUMAR,Advocate,Sr.No.71680 Order made in CRL.O.P.(MD).No.9022 of 2019 Dated:

27.06.2019 BUC(05.07.2019) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/