C.Manimaran v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 03.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL C.Manimaran ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai.

2. The Inspector of Police, S.S Colony Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai.

3. Gomathi ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original petitions have been filed under Section 528 of BNSS to direct the 1st respondent to instruct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner, under the guise of enquiry. 1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Srinivasaragavan, For R1 and R2 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R3 : Mr.S.Ramakrishnan

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the first respondent to instruct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner, under the guise of enquiry. 2.According to the petitioner, there is a property dispute pending between the parties in respect of S.F.No.98/2 to an extent of 2077 Sq.ft, for which, the third respondent has lodged a false complaint against the petitioner. Taking advantage of the same, the second respondent frequently called the petitioner under the guise of enquiry and used to harass him.

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the 2/5

respondent police would submit that based on the third respondent's complaint, the respondent police conducted enquiry. In the mean time, the third respondent has filed a writ petition in W.P(MD)No.2346 of 2025 before this Court and this Court also directed the respondent police to conduct enquiry and dispose of the same. Therefore, based on the order passed by this Court, the petitioner was called for enquiry. After receipt of summons, the petitioner without appearing for enquiry, has filed this petition. He would further submit that only for enquiry purpose, the respondent police has called the petitioner. 4.The learned Counsel for the third respondent would submit that the petitioner impersonated the third respondent and executed documents. Therefore, the third respondent has lodged the complaint before the second respondent.

5.Heard both sides and perused the records.

6.According to the respondent police, they called the petitioner only for enquiry purpose based on the order passed by this Court in W.P(MD)No.2346 of 2025. Therefore, recording submission made by 3/5

the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), this Criminal Original Petition is closed.

03.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR To

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai.

2. The Inspector of Police, S.S Colony Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai.

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

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J.

LR 03.03.2025 5/5