K. Murugan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL K.Murugan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by, The Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch-2, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.

3.T.S.Muthukrishnan ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023, to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 10.03.2025 and pass such other and further orders as this Court. 1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Thangaprakash For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 10.03.2025.

2. According to the petitioner, he is the owner of the property in S.No. 278/1A, Varthakareddipatti Village, Thoothukudi District and the third respondent causing disturbance to the petitioner from enjoying the property and thereby, between the parties a suit in O.S.No.486 of 1993 also filed. While so, based on the complaint given by the third respondent, the second respondent frequently called the petitioner. The petitioner also appeared on 25.02.2025 and 26.02.2025 in spite of that repeatedly the second respondent called the petitioner under the guise of enquiry. Therefore, he sent a representation, dated 10.03.2025 and explaining all the facts but the same has not been considered. Hence, the petitioner filed this petition.

2/5

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the official respondents would submit that the third respondent lodged a complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate under Section 175(3) of BNSS and the same was forwarded to the second respondent. For enquiry purpose, the second respondent called the petitioner but the petitioner appeared and thereafter, the second respondent has not harassed the petitioner as alleged by him.

4. Considering the prayer of the petitioner, this Court recording the above said submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the official respondents that for enquiry purpose, they called the petitioner apart from that they have not harassed the petitioner, this Criminal Original Petition stands closed.

19.03.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes BTR 3/5

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch-2, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.

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

4/5

P.DHANABAL, J.

BTR 19.03.2025 5/5