B. Senthilkumar v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 26.03.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL B.Senthilkumar .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep by the Commissioner of Police, Madurai, Madurai District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Theppakulam Crime Branch Police Station, Madurai District.

3.Ezhil Bharathy .. Respondents Prayer : Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of investigation regarding the complaint given by the third respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.V.P.Rajan For R1 & R2 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of investigation, based on the complaint given by the third respondent. 1/5

2. According to the petitioner, there is a dispute between the families of Kannan and the third respondent/Ezhil Bharathy. The said Kannan is now abroad and he has a property and thereby, there is a dispute between the third respondent and the said Kannan. The petitioner is the relative of the said Kannan as well as the third respondent. While so, the third respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioner as if he supported Kannan. Based on the said complaint, the second respondent frequently called the petitioner and harassed him. The petitioner already appeared before the second respondent and gave written submission, inspite of that the second respondent frequently called him. Therefore, he sent a representation on 15.03.2025, but the same has not been considered. Hence, this petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, submits that there is a property dispute between the third respondent and one Kannan, who is now abroad. The petitioner is relative to both the parties and based on the complaint given by the third respondent, the respondent-police called the petitioner for enquiry and the petitioner also appeared and gave statement. As per his statement, he has not involved in the dispute between the said Kannan 2/5

and the third respondent. Apart from that, the respondent-police has not harassed the petitioner.

4. Considering the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court even without issuing notice to the third respondent, is inclined to pass order in this petition.

5. According to the petitioner, the second respondent has harassed him under the guise of enquiry. The second respondent denied the same. On the complaint given by the third respondent, the second respondent called the petitioner for enquiry and the petitioner also appeared and gave statement, apart from that they have not harassed the petitioner. In view of the same, this Court, recording the submission of the second respondent, is inclined to close this petition. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is closed.

26.03.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Rmk 3/5

To:

1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai, Madurai District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Theppakulam Crime Branch Police Station, Madurai District.

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

4/5

P. DHANABAL ,J.

Rmk 26.03.2025 5/5