R.Selvaraj v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 05.06.2025 CORAM :

THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI R.Selvaraj ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu The Commissioner of Police, Madurai District.

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Sellur Circle, Koodalputhur, Madurai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Koodalputhur Police Station, Madurai District.

4.P.Ashokkumar

...Respondents

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to issue a direction directing the respondents 2 and 3 not to interfere in the civil dispute and thereby not to harras the petitioner in the name of enquiry based on the 4th respondent complaint. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Muruganantham For R1 to R3 : Mr.P.Kottaichamy Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/4

ORDER

The petitioner, an auto-consultant has approached this Court that the police are harassing him under the guise of enquiry based on the complaint of the 4th respondent.

2.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), who takes notice for the respondent police submits that the 4th respondent has lodged a complaint against the petitioner that the petitioner in the course of business transaction has received a sum of Rs.30 lakh from him, but has cheated without repaying and without producing any accounts. Based on the said complaint, a petition enquiry has been conducted by the 3rd respondent and during the enquiry, the petitioner has appeared and given a written statement admitting receipt of Rs.30 lakh from the 4th respondent and further stated that he had already paid Rs.16 lakh and remaining Rs.14 lakh would be paid within a period of six months. Therefore, according to the learned Government Advocate, they have closed the petition enquiry.

2/4

3.It appears to be a business transaction between the petitioner and the 4th respondent. The petitioner has admitted the receipt of money. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has also endorsed the statement given by the petitioner before the respondent police. Though the respondent police are not supposed to deal with the civil disputes, considering the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has given undertaking that he would settle the issue and the submission of the learned Government Advocate that they have closed the petition enquiry, this petition is closed as no further order is required. 05.06.2025 DSK To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai District.

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Sellur Circle, Koodalputhur, Madurai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Koodalputhur Police Station, Madurai District.

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

3/4

B.PUGALENDHI,J DSK 05.06.2025 4/4