Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/12575/2021disposed of

Santhana Muthu v. The Superintendent Of Police

2021-10-04Honourable Mr Justice G.Ilangovan2 pages

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12575 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.10.2021 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12575 of 2021 Santhana Muthu ... Petitioner vs.

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

2.The Inspector of Police, Puliangudi Police Station, Tenkasi District.

3.Thangaeswari

...Respondents.

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the first respondent to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of inquiry in connection with a complaint dated 23.07.2021. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Indrachithu For R1 & R2 : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This petition is filed seeking direction to the second respondent not to harass the petitioner on the basis of the complaint given by the third respondent.

2.When the matter was taken up for hearing on 01.09.2021, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the complaint given by the petitioner was closed on the ground that the petitioner was absconding and did not co-operate for the investigation. Hence, the second respondent was directed to conduct enquiry in a proper manner and inform the Court about the outcome of the enquiry. The petitioner was also directed to co-operate with the enquiry officer to complete the enquiry.

3.When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the enquiry was closed, on the basis of the undertaking given by the petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12575 of 2021 to the effect that the third respondent has given an undertaking that she will not make any trouble to the petitioner in future and the same was also accepted by the petitioner. 4.However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that no such undertaking was given by this petitioner. But signature of the petitioner is found place in the statement. However the statement cannot be matter for consideration in this petition.

5.Since the complaint given by the third respondent has been closed, nothing survives for further consideration or direction in this petition. However, if any trouble arise in future, the petitioner is at liberty to seek remedy through appropriate proceedings.

6.With the above said liberty, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AD-I) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) vrn 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, Tenkasi District,Tenkasi.

2.The Inspector of Police, Puliangudi Police Station, Tenkasi District.

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

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12575 of 2021 04.10.2021 NA(CO) KB(20.10.2021) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2