← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/4211/2025disposed of

Balachandran v. The State Of Tamilnadu

2025-03-06Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Crl.O.P(MD)No.4211 of 2025 Balachandran ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2. The Inspector of Police, Dindigul Town North Police Station, Dindigul District.

3. Thirulogachandran

4. Balasundari ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original petitions have been filed under Section 528 of BNSS to direct the 2nd Respondent and his officials not to harass the Petitioner and his family members unnecessarily against law under the guise of enquiry, on the basis of the Petitioners representation dt.25.02.2025. For Petitioner : Mr. S.Maya Perumal For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to direct the 2nd Respondent and his officials not to harass the petitioner and his family members unnecessarily against law under the guise of enquiry, on the basis of the Petitioner's representation, dated 25.02.2025. 2.According to the petitioner, there is a money dispute between the petitioner and the respondents 3 and 4. Based on the complaint lodged by the 4th respondent, a false case has been foisted against the petitioner by the 2nd respondent police. Taking advantage of the same, the 2nd respondent insisted the petitioner to repay the money to the respondents 3 and 4 and harassing the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner sent the representation dated 25.02.2025, but the same has not been considered. Hence this petition.

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that the petitioner was the ex-employee of the 4th respondent and while he was working as an Accountant cum Driver, he had misappropriated amount to the tune of Rs.60 lakhs. In this regard, the 4th respondent has lodged a complaint against the petitioner and

only for enquiry purpose, they have called the petitioner for enquiry and the petitioner has also repaid some amount. However, the representation given by the petitioner on 25.02.2025 is under enquiry. They will complete the enquiry within a period of one week.

4.Since the prayer of the petitioner is not to harass him and to consider his representation, the 2nd respondent has also admitted the receipt of the representation of the petitioner, dated 25.02.2025, it is for the 2nd respondent to complete the enquiry within a period of one week. 5.In view of the above, without issuing notice to the respondents 3 and 4, this Court is inclined to dispose of the petition by directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated 25.02.2025, in accordance with law within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of.

06.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No PNM

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2. The Inspector of Police, Dindigul Town North Police Station, Dindigul District.

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

P. DHANABAL, J.

PNM Crl.O.P(MD)No.4211 of 2025 06.03.2025