← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/4215/2025disposed of

Devclinten v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

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 Devclinten ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Commissioner of Police, Police Commissioner Office, Madurai.

2. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Deputy Police Commissioner Office, Thideer Nagar, Madurai.

3. The Inspector of Police, C2, Subramaniyapuram Police Station, Madurai.

4. R.P. Baskaran ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS to direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to direct the 3rd respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry of the false complaint given by the 4th respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr. A.Aruljenifer for M/s.KBS Law Office For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi (R1-R3) Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.R.Selvam (R4) 1/5

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to direct the 3rd respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry of the false complaint given by the 4th respondent.

2.According to the petitioner, there is a money dispute between the employer of the petitioner and the 4th respondent. Based on the complaint lodged by the 4th respondent, a false case has been foisted against the petitioner by the 3rd respondent police. Taking advantage of the same, the 3rd respondent harassing the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner sent a representation dated 27.02.2025, 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 based on the complaint lodged by the 4th respondent, they have conducted enquiry in CSR No.70 of 2025 and the same is under enquiry. They will complete the enquiry within a period of one week. However, the allegations levelled against the 2/5

petitioner are not true.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent would submit that there is a money dispute between the employer of the petitioner and the 4th respondent. He has denied all the allegations levelled against him.

5.Since the prayer of the petitioner is not to harass him, the 3rd respondent has also stated that they have not harassed the petitioner, based on the complaint lodged by the 4th respondent they called the petitioner for enquiry and the complaint lodged by the 4th respondent is under enquiry in CSR No.70 of 2025, it is for the 3rd respondent to complete the enquiry and dispose of the representation of the petitioner within a period of one week, in accordance with law. With the above directions and observation, this petition is disposed of.

06.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No PNM 3/5

To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Police Commissioner Office, Madurai.

2. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Deputy Police Commissioner Office, Thideer Nagar, Madurai.

3. The Inspector of Police, C2, Subramaniyapuram Police Station, Madurai.

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

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J.

PNM 06.03.2025 5/5