Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/8342/2017disposed of

P.K.Deepak v. The Superintendent Of Police

2017-07-04Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.07.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR CRL.O.P.(MD)No.8342 of 2017 P.K.Deepak : Petitioner -Vs1. The Superintendent of Police, District Collector Office, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Dindigul North Police Station, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

3.P.Karuppiah : Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to issue a direction to direct the respondents not to interfere in the civil dispute.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Thiruvarutselvan For RR 1 and 2 : Mr.K.Anbarasan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

It is an application seeking a direction to the respondents not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry with regard to the civil dispute.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondents 1 and 2. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent Police frequently called the petitioner to the Police Station and harassed him under the guise of enquiry in respect of a civil dispute. He further submits that there is a civil dispute pending between the petitioner and his father and a suit is also pending in O.S.No.86 of 2017 on the file of the District Court, Dindigul. Even in the said suit, the petitioner states that his father seeks relief of recovery of possession. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that based on the complaint given by the third respondent, the

petitioner was called only for enquiry in respect of a petition pending against him and that the respondent Police did not cause any harassment to the petitioner. However, he gave an undertaking that if at all the presence of the petitioner is required, the respondent would call the petitioner for enquiry only after issuing summons giving specific date, time and place. 5.Recording the above undertaking given by the learned Government Advocate, this Criminal Original Petition is closed. However, it is submitted that the petitioner's father seeks eviction of the petitioner otherwise than due process of law with the help of the second respondent. Since serious allegation is also made against the second respondent and the civil suit is also pending, the second respondent is directed not to harass the petitioner in relation to the dispute that is now pending in a civil court.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The Superintendent of Police, District Collector Office, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Dindigul North Police Station, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

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

+1cc to Mr.G.Thiruvarutselvan, Advocate Sr.No.63350 DAS/PJL VB/JC/SAR4/10.07.2017/2P/5C CRL.O.P.(MD)No.8342 of 2017 04.07.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/