Karuppan v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.09.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN Crl.O.P.[MD]No.10254 of 2020 Karuppan ... Petitioner Vs.

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

2.The Inspector of Police, Kundrathur Police Station, Sivagangai District. 3.Easwari ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to issue a direction to direct the respondents 1 and 2 or their men not to harass the petitioner without due process of law. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Joseph Jerry For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.S.Chandrasekar Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking a direction to direct the respondents 1 and 2 or their men not to harass the petitioner without due process of law. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent Police harassed the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, would submit that upon the complaint given by one Pandi against this petitioner, petition enquiry is pending in C.S.R.No.163 of 2020, on the file of the second respondent Police Station.

4.Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additioner Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.

1/3

5.It is the grievance of the petitioner that the respondents 1 and 2 have been harassing him under the guise of an enquiry/investigation and hence, invoking the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C is necessary for protecting the rights of the petitioner.

6.An enquiry into a non cognizable offence or a cognizable offence is the unfettered powers of the Investigation Officers so long as the power to investigate/enquire into these offences are legitimately exercised within the frame work of Chapter XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Though the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the Magistrate to be a guardian in all the stages of the police investigation, there is no power envisaging him to interfere with the actual investigation or the mode of investigation. It is in this background that numerous petitions complaining of harassment are being reported and filed before this Court seeking for directions to refrain the police officials from harassing the persons named in a complaint. 7.

This Court, exercising its power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code normally would not interfere with the investigation conducted by a police officer. Nevertheless, it would also not turn a blind eye to instances of harassment by the police under the guise of investigation is brought to its notice. 8.In the present case in hand, the petitioner has complained of harassment by the police based on a complaint and seek for this Court's intervention by way of a direction. The term 'harassment' by itself has a very wide meaning and hence, what could be harassment to the petitioner may not be the same to the police officer.

9.In order to circumvent such situations, the following guidelines are issued:

a)While summoning any person named in the complaint or any witness to the incident complained of, the police officer shall summon such person through a written summon under Section 160 Cr.P.C., specifying a particular date and time for appearing before them for such an enquiry/investigation. b) The second respondent police is directed to serve summons mentioning the CSR number, date of complaint and the name of the complainant.

c)The minutes of the enquiry shall be recorded in the general diary/station diary/daily diary of the police station. 2/3

d)The police officer shall refrain himself or herself from harassing persons called upon for enquiry/investigation. e)The guidelines stipulated for preliminary enquiry or registration of FIR by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others [2014 (2) SCC (1)] shall be strictly adhered to.

10.With the above observations and directions, the Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-I) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) tsg Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID19 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 Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kundrathur Police Station, Sivagangai District. Copy to The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Order made in Crl.O.P.[MD]No.10254 of 2020 Dated :24.09.2020 ss(CO) TR(06.10.2020) 3P 4C 3/3