← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/2214/2026disposed of

Murugan v. The State Of Tamilnadu, Rep. By The Superintendent Of Police, Virudhunagar,

2026-02-05Honourable Mrs Justice L.Victoria Gowri6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 05/02/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L. VICTORIA GOWRI Murugan ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep., By the Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar,, Virudhunagar District.

2. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep, by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar District.

3. Sasikumar ... Respondents PRAYER :- To direct the respondents No.2 not to Interfere the petitioner by interfering in the civil business transaction by considering the petitioners representation dated 20.11.2025 and 31.01.2026. For Petitioner : Mr. G.Mariappan, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar for R1 and R2 Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/6

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition is filed to direct the respondents No.2 not to interfere the petitioner by interfering in the civil business transaction by considering the petitioners representation dated 20.11.2025 and 31.01.2026.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the third respondent has given a complaint as against the petitioner and eight others with respect to a business transaction regarding the purchase of dal (pulses) in wholesale and retail. The second respondent police is unnecessarily meddling in their business and sought for the indulgence of this Court.

3. Per contra, learned Government Advocate submitted that the third respondent has given a complaint against the petitioner before the first respondent police. The third respondent is running abusiness and the petitioner has purchased dal to the tune of Rs.2,67,00,000/-. Proper bills have also been issued for all the transactions. 2/6

4. Per contra, learned cousnel for the petitioner submitted that he has no business transaction with the third respondent. The dal has been purchased by the third respondent from one Santosh SRS Traders and unnecessarily the petitioner is being roped in by the 3rd respondent by lodging a false complaint as against him. Further submitted that the petitioner already appeared several times before the second respondent and had produced all the necessary documents. Without being satisfied with the same, they are insisting for payment of certain money to the third respondent.

5. Learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) submitted that the enquiry has just commenced and it is for the investigating officer to take a decision as to whether the invoices and other bills produced by the petitioner is a genuine one or forged.

6. Heard either sides and carefully perused the materials available on record in this regard.

3/6

7. From the submissions made by either side, it is clear that the dispute involved is nothing but a business transaction between several persons. The police cannot meddle and compel a person to settle amount before the police station. If at all a crime is identified, the only way out to them, is to register a case and proceed investigation in the manner known to the law. In the instant case since the dispute which had arisen out of business transaction.

8. To allay the petitioners' apprehensions and to ensure fairness, the following directions are issued:

(a) With respect to the complaint received against the petitioner, if further enquiry is needed, the respondent-police shall issue written summons/notice under Section 62 of Cr.P.C., / Section 64 of BNSS, 2023, specifying the date, time, and purpose of enquiry. Oral or informal summons are prohibited.

(b) The enquiry, if undertaken, shall be completed within two weeks from the date of the petitioners' appearance. 4/6

(c) If the police, upon enquiry, conclude that a cognizable offence is made out and propose to register an FIR, the petitioners shall be given prior written notice, enabling them to seek legal remedies including anticipatory bail.

(d) If the dispute is found to be civil in nature, the complaint shall be closed forthwith, without any coercive or intimidatory action. (e) The respondents shall refrain from interfering in or attempting to adjudicate private civil rights between the parties.

9. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

05.02.2026 NCC : yes / no Index : yes / no Internet : yes / no pnn 5/6

L. VICTORIA GOWRI, J pnn TO

1. The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar,, Virudhunagar District. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar District.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.2214 of 2026 Date : 05/02/2026 6/6