Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10011/2021disposed of

K.Santham v. The Superintendent Of Police

2021-09-24Honourable Mr Justice G.Ilangovan2 pages

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10011 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.09.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10011 of 2021 K.Santham ... Petitioner Vs.

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

2.The Inspector of Police, Parthibanoor Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

3.Soorasangu ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to direct the 1st respondent to instruct the 2nd respondent herein not to interfere in the civil dispute in respect of the property comprised in S.No.52/3, Ponnakarai Village, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram under the guise of enquiry in pursuance to the complaint lodged by the 3rd respondent.

For Petitioner : No appearance For R1 & R2 : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor For R3 : Mr.G.Prabahari

ORDER

This petition is filed seeking direction to the 2nd respondent not to interfere in the civil dispute.

2.When the matter was taken up for hearing on 25.08.2021, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced a copy of the complaint that has been given by the 3rd respondent herein and the matter was directed to be listed today for final disposal. However, there is no representation for the petitioner today. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent is present.

3.Perusal of closure report shows that on the basis of the complaint given by the 3rd respondent herein, enquiry was undertaken in CSR.No.201 of 2021 and during the course of enquiry, the 3rd respondent herein appeared and the petitioner did not appear before the Enquiry Officer in spite of the repeated call. Because of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10011 of 2021 non-cooperation of the petitioner, the 3rd respondent has given a statement to the effect that if any trouble arises at the hands of the petitioner in future, he will workout his remedy before the appropriate Court through appropriate proceedings. On that ground, it came to be closed.

4.It is further seen that it is a land dispute between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent herein. Since the enquiry has been closed on the basis of the statement given by the 3rd respondent herein, nothing survives for further consideration or direction in this petition.

5.This petition stands dismissed as infructuous, accordingly. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AS) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) mm 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 Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Parthibanoor Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

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

+1 CC to M/s.G.PRABAHARI, Advocate ( SR-30359[F] dated 27/09/2021 ) Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10011 of 2021 24.09.2021 RD(5.10.2021) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2