K.R.Prakash Rajkumar v. The Superintendent Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.04.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI K.R.Prakash Rajkumar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi District.

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Thoothukudi District.

3.Benjamin Jacob Arulraj ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent not to interfere in the civil dispute in pursuance of the Rule 562 (2)(b) of Tamil Nadu Police Standing Order by considering the petitioner's representation dated 26.03.2026. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Poornachandran For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar (R1 & R2) Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

Seeking to direct the 2nd respondent police not to interfere in the civil dispute considering the petitioner's representation dated 26.0320026, this writ petition is filed.

1/6

2. Considering the limited scope of the relief sought for, notice to the private respondent is dispensed with.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a Educationalist who is running an educational institution in the name and style of D.G.Rajamani Educational and Charitable Trust as well as Rafzan Infotech. The petitioner's brother, namely Rajamani is residing in the United States of America. The 3rd respondent is acquainted with the petitioner's brother and had developed friendship with him. The 3rd respondent has invested sum to Rafzan Infotech. While so, the 3rd respondent started troubling the petitioner and the petitioner had made the said 3rd respondent as a partner in his business. While so, indifferences crept in between the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent.

When the 3rd respondent pressed the petitioner to return back the money invested in the firm, the petitioner and the 3rd respondent had entered into an amicable settlement, where the petitioner agreed to step out of the partnership and had relieved from the partnership firm. Pursuant to which, the petitioner resigned from Rafzan Infotech and handed over the same to the 3rd respondent. Similarly, the 3rd respondent resigned from D.G.Rajamani Educational and Charitable Trust.

phone and compelling the petitioner to appear before them for enquiry. The petitioner had duly attended enquiry before the 2nd respondent police on 26.03.2026 and had explained that he is no more connected with the 3rd respondent in any manner. However, the 2nd respondent police is continuously meddling. In this regard, a civil suit is also pending on the file of Franklin County Common Pleas Court, Frankling County, Ohio in Case No.25 CV 1393 between the petitioner's brother Rajamani and the 3rd respondent, and despite the petitioner having furnished all the necessary details, the police is continuing to trouble the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the 3rd respondent had lodged a complaint as against the petitioner through post to the Superintendent of Police and the same has been forwarded to the 2nd respondent police, for which C.S.R.No.188 of 2026 is also issued on 12.03.2026. Only in this regard, the petitioner was called for enquiry and the petitioner has appeared for enquiry twice, and the same is pending.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and carefully perused the materials available on record.

3/6

6. In this regard, the 2nd respondent police is directed to issue summon under Section 64 BNSS, 2023. The petitioner is directed to produce all the necessary documents which would substantiate his claim that already a civil suit is pending before the Franklin County Common Pleas Court, Frankling County, Ohio in Case No.25 CV 1393 between the petitioner's brother Rajamani and the 3rd respondent. On receipt of the same, the 2nd respondent is directed to enquire the 3rd respondent and give an opportunity of hearing and investigate as to whether the 3rd respondent's claim against the petitioner is independent of the pending civil suit and if it is found that it is interconnected, the 2nd respondent policy is directed to close the matter, and if not, proceed in accordance with law.

7. With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

08.04.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No gbg 4/6

TO:- 1.The Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi District.

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Thoothukudi District.

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

5/6

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

gbg Order made in Dated 08.04.2026 6/6