Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/16326/2016disposed of

Vellaisamy, v. The Superintendent Of Police,

2016-09-08Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.09.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.16326 of 2016 1.Vellaisamy 2.Vasanthakumari .. Petitioners -Vs1.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Ponnamaravathi Police Station, Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkottai District.

... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioners on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 20.08.2016. For Petitioner : Mr.Karthick Subramanian For Respondent : Mr.K.Anbarasan Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent not to harass the petitioners on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 20.08.2016. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the son of the petitioners has eloped with the wife of the defacto complainant and subsequently both of them appeared before the second respondent. Based on the submissions obtained from the witnesses, the issue was referred to the Village Panchayat and the defacto complainant had agreed to withdraw the complaint, after receiving a sum of Rs.85,000/- from the son of the petitioners. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would further submit that the petitioners' son had already given the sum of Rs.85,000/- to the defacto complainant and now the respondent police are insisting the appearance of the petitioners and demanding Rupees Three Lakhs more.

5. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents would submit that after referring the matter for settlement before the Village Panchayat, neither the accused nor the defacto complainant reported the matter to the second second respondent. So, they issued summons for the appearance of the accused and they have not harassed the petitioners in order to demand more money from them.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by both sides, the second respondent is directed to conduct enquiry without harassing the petitioners.

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

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(RTI) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To:

1.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Ponnamaravathi Police Station, Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkottai District.

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

+1cc to MR.T.Vadivelan, Advocate SR.No.51213 ssl sm:SKS-RR:21/09/2016:2P/5C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.16326 of 2016 08.09.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/