Rani v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 30.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Rani ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.

2. The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Madurai District.

3. Jeyabal ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS to direct the 2nd Respondent police not to interfere the civil dispute in the guise of harassed to the petitioner to appear before the 2nd respondent police although the earlier Crl.O.P(MD) No.9929 of 2023 filed by the petitioner adding the first and second respondents are parties to the proceeding got this order by collusion. Therefore, the second respondent has no jurisdiction at all by the order passed in Crl.O.P(MD)No.9929 of 2023, dated 08.06.2023. 1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Vadivel, For R1 and R2 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R3 : Mr.J.Ashwin

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent police not to interfere the civil dispute in the guise of harassed to the petitioner to appear before the second respondent police.

2.According to the petitioner, based on the complaint lodged by third respondent, the respondent police are harassing the petitioner under the guise of enquiry and interfered with the civil dispute pending between the parties. Hence this petition.

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the 2/5

respondent police would submit that based on the complaint lodged by third respondent, CSR has been assigned and subsequently, the third respondent filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P(MD)No.10797 of 2025 and this Court directed the respondent police to conduct enquiry based on the third respondent. Therefore, the respondent police issued summons to the petitioner for enquiry purpose, but she has not appeared for enquiry. Apart from that they have not harassed the petitioner as alleged in this petition. Hence he prayed to dismiss this petition. 4.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court, without even issuing notice to the private respondent, is inclined to pass order.

5.Since the prayer of the petitioner is not to interfere with the civil dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent and the respondent police also denied the alleged harassment and only for enquiry purpose they have called the petitioner and apart from that they have not harassed the petitioner as alleged in this petition, recording the same, this criminal original petition is closed with a direction to the second respondent to complete the enquiry as ordered by this Court in 3/5

W.P(MD)No.10797 of 2025.

6.It is needless to mention that if the matter is civil in nature, then the second respondent police has to follow the circular issued by the Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu in this regard. 30.04.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR To

1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.

2. The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Madurai District.

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

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J.

LR 30.04.2025 5/5