S. Ayyappan v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL S.Ayyappan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Madurai.

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Madurai.

3.The Inspector of Police, C4 Thilagar Thidal Police Station, Madurai.

... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to direct the third respondent to not to harass the petitioner by interfering with the petitioner's business on the basis of the petitioner's representation, dated 08.01.2025 in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court and pass such further or other orders as this Court. For Petitioner : M/s.R.Manibharathi 1/5

For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to instruct the third respondent not to harass the petitioner by interfering with the petitioner's business on the basis of the petitioner's representation, dated 08.01.2025.

2. According to the petitioner, he is the street vendor and selling fruits in the street in the platform. While so, the third respondent threatened the petitioner to not to sell the fruits in the platform. Thereby, the petitioner sent a representation, dated 08.01.2025 and the same has not been considered. Hence, the petitioner filed this petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner by blocking the access to the police booth situated at Thilagar Thidal outpost and the same was questioned by the police. Therefore, the petitioner immediately filed this petition by 2/5

sending representation, dated 08.01.2025. In fact the petitioner only caused disturbance to the third respondent police by pouring the fruits in front of the police booth. Apart from that, the third respondent has not harassed the petitioner as alleged by him. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed.

4. The prayer of the petitioner is to direct the third respondent not to harass the petitioner by interfering with the petitioner's business in the street vending and the same was denied by the third respondent. Since the third respondent denied the harassment, recording the above said submission of the second respondent, this Criminal Original Petition stands closed. 24.03.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes BTR 3/5

To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Madurai.

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Madurai.

3.The Inspector of Police, C4 Thilagar Thidal Police Station, Madurai.

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

4/5

P.DHANABAL, J.

BTR 24.03.2025 5/5