K.R.Balaji v. The Inspector Of Police

CRL.O.P(MD).No.8009 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :18.06.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN CRL.O.P(MD).No.8009 of 2021 K.R.Balaji ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Inspector of Police (L & O), S.S.Colony Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai.

2.Karthika Devi.

... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to direct the first respondent not to interfere the civil dispute more particularly compelling the petitioner to vacate the Dental Clinic run by the petitioner in the name and style of "Tooth Care Centre" situated at No.24-A, Tass Complex North Gate, S.S.Colony, Madurai-10 on the basis of the complaint of the second respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Satheeshkumar For R1 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the first respondent not to interfere the civil dispute more particularly compelling the petitioner to vacate the Dental Clinic run by the petitioner in the name and style of "Tooth Care Centre" situated at No.24-A, Tass Complex North Gate, S.S.Colony, Madurai-10 on the basis of the complaint of the second respondent.

2. The case of the petitioner is that it is a purely civil dispute between him and the second respondent. Based on the false complaint given by the second respondent, the first respondent is continuously harassing him to vacate the premises. Hence, the present petition has been filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is in possession of the subject property for several years as lessee and the second respondent has become https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

CRL.O.P(MD).No.8009 of 2021 owner in the recent years. The second respondent threatened the petitioner to pay double the value of the rent from the previous rent fixed by the then lessor. Further, the second respondent has given a false complaint before the first respondent. On that basis, the first respondent is pressurizing the petitioner either to vacate the premises or to pay the enhanced rent.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that based on the complaint given by the second respondent, enquiry was undertaken. During the enquiry, it was found that it is a purely civil dispute between the petitioner and the second respondent and they compromised. Therefore, the complaint was closed on 15.06.2021.

6. In view of the above submission, nothing survives for further adjudication in this matter. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CSIII) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) ssb Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. To:

1.The Inspector of Police (L & O), S.S.Colony Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai.

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

CRL.O.P(MD).No.8009 of 2021 18.06.2021 KB(29.06.2021) 2P 3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2