← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/12753/2016disposed of

Ambikapathi v. The Director Genral Of Police

2016-07-26Honourable Dr. Justice S. Vimala3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26.07.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE S.VIMALA Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12753 of 2016 Ambikapathi .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Director General of Police, Seaward Road, Chennai.

2 The Chairman, Human Rights Commission, Chennai.

3 Vandidapanden The Superintendent of Police, Karur District, Karur.

4 Periyaiah The deputy superintendent of police, Karur District, Karur.

5 Chandrasekar The Inspector of police, Pasupathiypalayam Police Station, Karur District.

6 Sujatha The sub inspector of police, Pasupathipalayam Police Station, Karur District.

7 Murugesan The Special Sub Inspector of Police, Pasupathiypalayam Police Station, Karur District.

8 V.K.C.Rajendran 9 Dhanalakshmi .. Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to direct the fifth respondent and his subordinates not to harass the petitioner in the guise of enquiry and to follow the due process of law.

For Petitioner : No appearance For 1st respondent : Mr.P.Kandasamy, Government Advocate (Criminal side)

ORDER

It is an application seeking a direction to the fifth respondent and his subordinates not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

2.The brief facts, as stated in the petition, run as under: On the basis of the complaint lodged by the 9th respondent herein that when she asked the petitioner to receive the amount borrowed, he refused to receive the same and he, along with other accused, trespassed into her houses, assaulted her, stayed in her house and threatened her to vacate from the house, a case has been registered against the petitioner and others in Crime No.441 of 2016 under Sections 447, 323, 342, 506(i) and 379 IPC. Based on the said complaint, the 4th respondent abused the petitioner by his caste name and put him illegal custody. The 4th and 5th respondents received Rs.5 lakhs for non implicating the 8th respondent herein in this case. The 6th and 7th respondents illegally trespassed into his house and evicted him and handed over possession of the house to the 9th respondent. The 3rd respondent failed to monitor the custodial violation of the 5th respondent. Hence, he has come up with this petition.

3.There is no representation for the petitioner. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the first respondent. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) would submit that a case has been registered against the petitioner and others in Crime No.441 of 2016 under Sections 447, 323, 342, 506(i) and 379 IPC; the respondents 4 to 7 did not cause any harassment to the petitioner as stated in the petition; and the petitioner has raised only bald allegations against the respondents 4 to 7. 5.It is seen that the petitioner has raised only vague allegations against the respondents 4 to 7 and even such vague allegations have not been averred properly. The petitioner has not filed any document in order to substantiate his averments. Under such circumstances, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-II) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SEAWARD ROAD, CHENNAI.

2.

THE CHAIRMAN, HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, CHENNAI.

3.

THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

4.

VANDIDAPANDEN THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KARUR DISTRICT, KARUR.

5. PERIYAIAH THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KARUR DISTRICT, KARUR.

6. CHANDRA SEKAR THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PASUPATHIYPALAYAM POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT.

7. SUJATHA THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PASUPATHIPALAYAM POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT.

8. MURUGESAN THE SPECIAL SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PASUPATHIYPALAYAM POLICE STATION, KARUR DISTRICT. Crl.O.P(MD)No.12753 of 2016 26.07.2016 SH/ARK-PV:05.08.2016:3P/9C