← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/6524/2025disposed of

Radhika v. The State Of Tamilnadu

2025-04-08Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Radhika ... Petitioner Vs.

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

2. The Inspector of Police, Kumbakonam East Police Station, Kumbakonam.

(In Crime No.Unknown)

3. Sudha ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to direct the respondent police to not to harass the petitioner in the guise of an enquiry. For Petitioner : Mr. M.Dinesh Hari Sudarsan For R1 & R2 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side) Page No. 1 of 5

O R D E R

This petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the respondent police to not to harass the petitioner in the guise of an enquiry,

2. According to the petitioner, he is the owner of the property and the 3rd respondent is a tenant and there is a tenancy dispute between them. While so, the 3rd respondent vacated the property on 15.02.2025 and thereafter, he came to know about the damages caused by the 3rd respondent and thereby, there is a dispute arose between them. The petitioner already lodged a complaint against the tenant for the life threat made by her along with other persons on 16.03.2025 and thereafter, the 3rd respondent lodged a false complaint against the petitioner and based on the same, the 2nd respondent used to harass the petitioner by frequently calling the petitioner and insisted to pay money to the 3rd respondent. Therefore, the petitioner sent a representation dated 01.04.2025, but the same has not been considered. Hence this petition.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents no.1 and 2 would submit that there is a Page No. 2 of 5

tenancy dispute between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent and thereby, the petitioner lodged a complaint against the 3rd respondent. Similarly, the 3rd respondent also lodged a complaint against the petitioner. Both the complaints are pending for enquiry and they will conduct enquiry and take appropriate action in accordance with law.

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

5. According to the petitioner, the 2nd respondent harassed the petitioner under the guise of enquiry and the 2nd respondent denied the alleged harassment and only based on the complaint lodged by the 3rd respondent, they called the petitioner. Therefore, it is for the 2nd respondent to conduct enquiry and take appropriate action in accordance with law. In view of the same, this Court directs the 2nd respondent to conduct enquiry on the complaint lodged by the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of fifteen days [15] from the date of this order. Page No. 3 of 5

6. With the above said observation and direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

08.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Mac To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur..

2. The Inspector of Police, Kumbakonam East Police Station, Kumbakonam.

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

Page No. 4 of 5

P.DHANABAL, J.

Mac CRL. OP(MD) No.6524 of 2025 08.04.2025 Page No. 5 of 5