Senthilnathan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.03.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Crl.O.P.(MD) No.5752 of 2025 Senthilnathan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Commissioner of Police, Madurai, Madurai City.

2. The Inspector of Police, Mattuthavani Police Station, Madurai.

...Respondents

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to issue a direction directing the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry without due process of law, on basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 22.03.2025. For Petitioner : Ms.T.Joshua For R1 & R2 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/4

ORDER

This petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry without due process of law, on basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 22.03.2025.

2. According to the petitioner, the second respondent harassed the petitioner by frequently asking him to appear for enquiry without issuing any summon. Therefore, he sent a representation dated 22.03.2025, but the same has not been considered. Hence this petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner lent money to one Raja by pleading his Car. Thereafter, the said Raja want to redeem his Car by paying the money, but the petitioner refusing to return back the Car after receiving the money and thereby, he lodged a complaint against the petitioner. Based on the said complaint, the second respondent called the petitioner for enquiry and they issued summon, but the petitioner is evading from service of summon. In the mean time, he has filed this petition and the second respondent has not harassed the petitioner as alleged by him. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed. 2/4

4. Considering the prayer sought for in the petition and the second respondent has also denied the alleged allegations and only based on the complaint given by one Raja, the second respondent called the petitioner for enquiry, recording the above said submission of the learned Government Advocate, this Criminal Original Petition is closed. 27.03.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Mac To

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

2. The Inspector of Police, Mattuthavani Police Station, Madurai.

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

3/4

P. DHANABAL , J.

Mac Crl.O.P.(MD) No.5752 of 2025 27.03.2025 4/4