← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9904/2018dismissed

M.Mani @ Muthiah v. The Director General Of Police

2018-06-21Honourable Mr Justice D. Krishnakumar2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21.06.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR CRL.O.P.(MD)No.9904 of 2018 M.Mani @ Muthiah ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, Chennai.

2. The Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.

4. The Inspector of Police, Solavanthan Police Station, Madurai District.

5.G.V.Jayaprathaban ... Respondents Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to direct the fourth respondent police not to harass the petitioner while the private complaint is pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti, for the offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 447, 506(ii) and 120(b) of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Exorbitant Interest Act.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Rajendran For R1 to R4 : Mr.K.K.Ramakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor For R5 : Mr.R.Anand

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the fourth respondent police not to harass the petitioner while the private complaint is pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti, for the offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 447, 506(ii) and 120(b) of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Exorbitant Interest Act.

2.According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the fourth respondent police is harassing him on the complaint made by the de-facto complainant, which pertains to money transaction. Therefore, he has approached this Court with the present Criminal Original Petition.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that on the basis of the complaint preferred by the de-facto complainant, an enquiry was conducted and the enquiry reveals that the petitioner has already preferred complaints in Crime Nos.218/2003, 316/2005, 583/2005, 44/2006, 38/2007, 249/2007, 246/2008, 52/2009, 287/2009, 215/2015, 272/2015, 336/2015 and 374/2017 under various provisions of law. Further, the complaint preferred by the de-facto complainant was enquired and the same was closed, as both the parties have amicably settled the issue. It is further submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that in view of the closure of Petition No.222/2018, the present Criminal Original Petition is liable to be dismissed.

4.The learned counsel for the fifth respondent submitted that the dispute between the petitioner and the fifth respondent was settled amicably and therefore, the complaint was withdrawn. 5.Recording the above said submissions made by both parties, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. If the petitioner is having any grievance, it is open to him to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(P&A) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti.

2. The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, Chennai.

3. The Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai.

4. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.

5. The Inspector of Police, Solavanthan Police Station, Madurai District.

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

smn2 MK/VR/SAR 2/04.07.2018/2P/7C CRL.O.P.(MD) No.9904 of 2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 21.06.2018