E. Palavesam v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.03.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Crl.O.P.(MD) No.5800 of 2025 E. Palavesam ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Kallidaikurichi Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

3. Stella

...Respondents

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to direct the 2nd respondent not to harass the Petitioner under the guise of enquiry frequently and pass such further or other orders.

For Petitioner : Mr. M.Jegadeesh Pandian For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of 1/4

enquiry.

2. According to the petitioner, there is a money dispute pending between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent and thereby, the 3rd respondent lodged a false complaint against the petitioner. Taking advantage of the same, the 2nd respondent frequently called the petitioner for enquiry for the money dispute. Therefore, he sent a representation dated 03.03.2025, but the same has not been considered. Hence this petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents no.1 and 2 would submit that the 3rd respondent pledged the jewel in the bank and thereafter, in order to redeem the above said jewel and to pledge in an another bank, he approached the petitioner and the petitioner has also agreed for that and paid the amount to redeem the jewels from the bank. Thereafter, when the 3rd respondent asked the petitioner to pledge the jewels in another bank, he refused to give the jewels and thereby, the 3rd respondent lodged a complaint before the 2nd respondent and the same is under enquiry. However, they have not harassed the petitioner as alleged by him and they will complete the enquiry and dispose of the same within one week.

2/4

4. Considering the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court without even issuing notice to the 3rd respondents inclined to pass orders.

5. According to the petitioner, the 2nd respondent harassing the petitioner by insisting to appear for enquiry and the according to the 2nd respondent, the 3rd respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioner and for enquiry purpose, they called the petitioner. Since the complaint of the 3rd respondent is pending with the 2nd respondent, the 2nd respondent has to conduct enquiry and dispose of the same in accordance with law. Therefore, recording the above said submission of the 2nd respondent, this Court directs the 2nd respondent to complete the enquiry on the complaint of the 3rd respondent and dispose of the same within a period of one week from the date of this order.

6. With the above said observation and direction, this criminal original petition is disposed of.

28.03.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Mac 3/4

P. DHANABAL , J.

Mac To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Kallidaikurichi Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

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

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.5800 of 2025 28.03.2025 4/4