Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/2563/2025disposed of

Divakaran v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

2025-02-12Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :12.02.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. Divakaran

2. Manimegalai ... petitioners Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch, Sivagangai District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Singampunari Police Station, Sivagangai District.

3. S. Thiyagarajan

...Respondents

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to issue a direction the Respondents not to harass the petitioners in any way unlawfully.

For petitionerss : Mr.B.Bhuvaneshvari for Mr.Ganesh Legist Law Firm For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl. side)

ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioners to direct the respondents not 1/4

harass the petitioners unlawfully.

2. According to the petitioners, the 3rd respondent used to lodge false complaint against the petitioners and already so many times, the enquiry was conducted and the same was closed. However, once again, the 3rd respondent lodged a complaint before the Legal Services Authority, Singampunari and now, the Legal Services Authority issued notice to the petitioners to appear on 07.02.02024. However, the 2nd respondents insisted the petitioners to appear before the police station for enquiry. Already the enquiry was conducted and closed, the 2nd respondent need not insist the petitioners to come to the police station.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents no.1 and 2 would submit that already they received complaint from the 3rd respondent as against the petitioners and the same was enquired and closed on 10.07.2024. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent once again sent a complaint to the Legal service Authority, Singampunari and based on the complaint, the Legal Services Authority only sent notice to the petitioners and the 2nd respondent has not approached the petitioners by insisted them for enquiry.

2/4

4. Since the 2nd respondent himself represented that they have not insisted the petitioners to attend enquiry before the police and already the complaint was closed on 10.07.2024, it is appropriate to record the submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that they have not insisted the petitioners to appear before the respondent police as no any current paper is pending against the petitioner.

5. Recording the submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. No costs. 12.02.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes mac To

1. The Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch, Sivagangai District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Singampunari Police Station, Sivagangai District.

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

3/4

P. DHANABAL , J., mac 12.02.2025 4/4