Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/3878/2020disposed of

Subramaniyan v. The Superintendent Of Police

2020-03-02Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan2 pages

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3878 of 2020 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.03.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Crl.O.P(MD)No.3878 of 2020 1.Subramaniyan 2.P.Manoharan ... Petitioners Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District, Pudukottai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Sammatty Viduthi Police Station, Pudukottai.

... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, to issue a direction directing the second respondent not to harass the petitioners, without following due process of law.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Murugappan For R1 & R2 : Mr.A.Robinson Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

2.The petitioners allege harassment at the hands of the second respondent.

3.When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the fellow villagers of the petitioners had given a compliant to the second respondent alleging that the amounts collected from them by way of deposit by the petitioners have not been returned. It appears that the petitioners had collected money from the fellow villagers and deposited the same in a Company known as Azure Agrow Tech Ltd., having their office at Salem.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3878 of 2020 4.The petitioner's counsel would state that the petitioners had also deposited their hard earned money in the said company. It appears that the company had defaulted and the case is presently pending before SEBI. The properties of the company also appear to have been frozen.

The second respondent had mechanically closed the complaint.

5. I am of the view that on the face of it, the case attracts the offence under TNPID Act. The second respondent has clearly erred in closing the complaint. what the second respondent should have done is to formally transfer the papers to EOW 2, Pudukottai. Therefore, the second respondent is directed to forward the complaint and other relevant papers to the Jurisdictional EOW 2, Pudukottai, forthwith and without any delay. 6.With this direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CRL SIDE) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) rmi To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District, Pudukottai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Sammatty Viduthi Police Station, Pudukottai.

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

+1 CC to M/s.R.MURUGAPPAN, Advocate ( SR-9716[F] dated 03/03/2020 ) Crl.O.P(MD)No.3878 of 2020 02.03.2020 SBS(CO) TR(13.03.2020) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2