Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/8491/2024closed

S.Veerababhu v. The Superintendent Of Police

2025-03-17Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL S.Veerababhu ... Petitioner Vs

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

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

(Crime No.3/2024).

... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original petitions have been filed under Section 528 of BNSS to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner, based on the summons dated 29.05.2024 issued by the second respondent.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Shanmuga Selvam, For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent not to harass the petitioner, based on the summons dated 29.05.2024 issued by the second respondent. 2.The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that earlier one Vidyasagar lodged a complaint against the petitioner on 02.04.2024 and an FIR in Crime No.3 of 2024 was registered by the second respondent. On 06.04.2024, four persons along with one Adhiswaran trespassed into the petitioner's house and threatened to settle the amount to the defacto complainant and asked to appear before the respondent police on 09.03.2024. The petitioner also appeared on that date and the second respondent compelled the petitioner to settle the matter. 2/5

Therefore, the petitioner made a representation on 23.04.2024 to take action against the persons, who entered into the house of the petitioner. Again the second respondent issued a summons to enquire the matter on 29.05.2024. When the petitioner made allegations against the second respondent, he cannot enquire the matter. Hence this petition. 3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that based on the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, the respondent police issued summons to the petitioner for his appearance for enquiry, but he has not appeared and filed this petition. Moreover, the particular officer, against whom the petitioner made allegations is already transferred to some other place and now a new officer has taken charge. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioner has become infructuous.

4.Since the prayer of the petitioner is not to harass the petitioner based on the summons dated 29.05.2024 and he also made allegations against the erstwhile officer of the second respondent police station and now he was transferred to some other police station, recording the 3/5

submission made on behalf of the second respondent, this Criminal Original Petition is closed.

17.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR To

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

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

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

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J.

LR 17.03.2025 5/5