Sahul Hameed Baathusha v. The Commissioner Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.04.2021 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.OP(MD).No.5022 of 2021 Sahul Hameed Baathusha : Petitioner Vs.

1. The Commissioner of Police, O/o. The Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City.

2. The Inspector of Police, Melapalayam Police Station, Tirunelveli District. : Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner in the guise of enquiry by considering the petitioner's representation dated 11.03.2021. For Petitioner : Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah For Respondents : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate.

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry by considering the petitioners representation, dated 11.03.2021.

2. The petitioner is running a Meat shop. In his childhood days, he joined in Islamic Associations, discourse, meetings, awareness programmes conducted in order to abolish the Anti-women violence, Anti-child issues, Anti-drug society etc., Due to the petitioner's serious involvement in Islamic Associations, Police warned and threatened him many times. But the petitioner continued his service. Due to that vengeance, the second respondent had foisted a false case against the petitioner. However, the petitioner is enlarged on bail and he has been leading his life peacefully. At this juncture, on December 2020, the respondent forcibly took the petitioner to the Police Station under the guise of enquiry and forced him to sign in bond papers in order to register a case under section 110 Cr.P.C., against him.

At that time, the petitioner with his Advocate's support, left from the station. Due to this vengeance, the second respondent has falsely implicated the petitioner as an accused in Crime No.35 of 2021. On that case, petitioner got bail and has been living peacefully. Thereafter the 2nd respondent had frequently insisted the petitioner to appear before them without following the statutory procedures and they https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.

tried to illegally obtain his signature in order to foist a false under Section Section 110 Cr.P.C In this regard, on 11.03.2021, the petitioner sent a representation to the 1st respondent to take appropriate action as against the second respondent. But there was no effective action taken till date. Hence he filed this present Criminal Revision Petition.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that, in pursuance of which, the Petitioner has also executed a bond on 30.03.2021, has also been served on the other side.

4. It is seen that after execution of bond, there is change in the circumstances. Hence, nothing survives in this petition and no further orders are required.

5. With the above observations, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed as infructuous.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS II) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) kmm To

1. The Commissioner of Police, O/o. The Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City.

2. The Inspector of Police, Melapalayam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

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

Crl.OP.(MD).No.5022 of 2021 22.04.2021 MGJ(11.08.2021) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/