Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/5928/2025disposed of

Vinoth v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

2025-04-01Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.04.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Vinoth .. Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent of Police District Police Crime Dindigul, Dindigul District

2. The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch Dindigul, Dindigul District 3.Saravanvan .. Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to direct the second respondent herein to not to harass the petitioner and not to interefere in the civil dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent in the light of the petitioner's representation dated 24.03.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sundar For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar No.1 and 2 Government Advocate(Crl.Side) No.3 : Mr. D.Venkatesh 1/5

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the second respondent herein to not to harass the petitioner and not to interefere in the civil dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent in the light of the petitioner's representation dated 24.03.2025.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that there is a dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent in respect of purchase of property for which the petitioner and the third respondent entered into agreement. Now the third respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioner before the second respondent, taking advantage of the same the second respondent is insisting the petitioner to return back the original documents without paying money. Therefore the petitioner has sent a representation dated 24.03.2024 but the same has not been considered, hence the present petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent would submit that he is the owner of the property and he entered into agreement with the petitioner in respect of sale of property. The petitioner also paid a 2/5

sum of Rs.2Crores and 11 lakhs and the third respondent also entrusted the original document to the petitioner and thereafter the petitioner is unable to pay the balance amount and to get the sale deed in his favour. While so the third respondent is ready to pay the above amount received by him from the petitioner but the petitioner failed to receive the amount and to return the documents, therefore he lodged complaint before the second respondent.

4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that based on the complaint given by the third respondent they called the petitioner for enquiry and they have not harassed the petitioner as alleged by him in the petition. However they will complete the enquiry within a period of one week from the date of this order.

5. Considering the limited scope of prayer sought for in this petition and also recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate(Crl. Side) that they have not harassed the petitioner this Court directs the second respondent to conduct enquiry and dispose of the same within a period of one week from the date of this order. 3/5

6. With the above direction, the Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.

01.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No aav To

1. The Superintendent of Police District Police Crime Dindigul, Dindigul District

2. The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch Dindigul, Dindigul District 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P.DHANABAL,J.

aav 01.04.2025 5/5