Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/3515/2024disposed of

P.Pandiyarajan v. The Superintendent Of Police

2024-03-06Honourable Mr Justice Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.03.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP CRL.O.P (MD) No.3515 of 2024 P.Pandiyarajan, ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram.

2. The Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Town Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

3. Saravana Perumal, ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to direct the respondent no.2 not to harass the petitioner and his family members under the guise of enquiry in the Rent control matter. 1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Senthil For R1 & R2 : Mr.M.Veeranthiran Government Advocate (Crl. side)

O R D E R

The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner was a tenant under the third Respondent's mother. Originally, he paid an advance amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and entered into a lease agreement. As per the lease agreement, he has to pay a sum of Rs.100/- as rent per month. The mother of the third Respondent died. Therefore, the third Respondent. After the third Respondent became the landlord, the third Respondent had been insisting the Petitioner to vacate and hand over the possession. The Petitioner had filed a suit in O.S.No.18 of 2024, on the file of the learned District Munsif, Paramakudi. Now, the Petitioner had been harassed by the Respondents 1 and 2 on the basis of the complaint given by the third Respondent. Therefore, the Petitioner is forced to file this petition seeking a direction not to harass the Petitioner.

2. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that no such complaint has been received from the third Respondent. It is the other way 2/5

the petitioner has alleged to have given a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, for which, further proceedings have not been received. If it is received, the second respondent to undertakes to follow the guidelines issued in the circular of the Director General of Police, Head of State Police Force, Tamil Nadu State, Chennai -4 issued in Rc.No.892914/X1/2020 dated 12.03.2021 that the Field Officers shall not entertain any dispute regarding property and money.

3.Considering the submission of the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and that the matter involves is a civil dispute, the respondents 1 and 2 are directed to follow the circular of the Director General of Police, Head of State Police Force, Tamil Nadu State, Chennai -4 issued in Rc.No.892914/X1/2020 dated 12.03.2021. If there is violation of the circular of Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu by the Respondents 1 and 2, it will attract Departmental action against the Respondents 1 and 2. Therefore, the Respondents 1 and 2 are warned accordingly.

3/5

4.With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.

06.03.2024 NCC : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No LR To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram.

2. The Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Town Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

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

4/5

SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP , J.

LR CRL.O.P (MD) No.3515 of 2024 06.03.2024 5/5