T.T.Krishnan v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.03.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL T.T.Krishnan ... Petitioner Vs

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

2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch - II, Trichy District, Trichy.

3. V.Gokulakrishnan ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent not to harass the petitioner on the guise of enquiry based on false complaint on the basis of petitioner's representation dated 05.03.2025.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.T. Vadivelan, For R1 and R2 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent not to harass the petitioner on the guise of enquiry based on false complaint, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 05.03.2025.

2.According to the petitioner, there is a civil dispute pending between the petitioner and the third respondent in respect of an agreement for the immovable property, thereby, the third respondent lodged a false complaint against the petitioner. Taking advantage of the same, the respondent police frequently called the petitioner to appear for enquiry. Therefore, the petitioner sent the representation dated 05.03.2025, but the same has not been considered. Hence this petition. 2/5

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that the third respondent lodged the complaint against the petitioner for the suppression of decree in respect of the subject property and thereby, the respondent police called the petitioner for enquiry but the petitioner did not appear for enquiry and the respondent police have also received a representation from the petitioner, dated 05.03.2025. The respondent police will consider and dispose of both the complaints within a period of one week. 4.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court, without even issuing notice to the private respondent, is inclined to pass order.

5.According to the petitioner, the second respondent is interfering in the civil dispute and harassing the petitioner. However, the second respondent denied the allegations made by the petitioner. According to the second respondent, the third respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioner and for enquiry purpose, they called the petitioner. Apart from that the respondent police have not harassed the petitioner. 3/5

6.Since the prayer of the petitioner is to direct the second respondent not to harass him and the second respondent denied the alleged harassment, recording the submission made on behalf of the second respondent, this Courts directs the second respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation, dated 05.03.2025 and the complaint of the third respondent, within a period of one week in accordance with law. 7.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. 19.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR To

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

2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch - II, Trichy District, Trichy.

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

4/5

P.DHANABAL , J.

LR 19.03.2025 5/5