Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/12888/2021dismissed

S.Madasamy v. The Superintendent Of Police

2021-09-06Honourable Mr Justice G.Ilangovan2 pages

Crl.O.P. (MD)No.12888 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:06.09.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12888 of 2021 S.Madasamy ... Petitioner/Accused Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Triunelveli 2.The Inspector of Police, Anti Land Grabbing (Special cell), Tirunelveli District, Triunelveli.

3.S.Pavanasam ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to direct the second respondent police not to harass the petitioner in the guise of the enquiry.

For Petitioner : M/s. C.Saravana Kumar For R1 & R2 : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi Government Advocate(Crl.side)

O R D E R

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

2. The petitioner and the third respondent are brothers. It appears that in respect of property dispute, a suit in O.S.No.93 of 2010 has been filed by the petitioner and it is pending before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi. According to the petitioner, preliminary decree was passed on 12.01.2012 and thereafter final decree application was filed and an Advocate Commissioner was appointed. I.A.NO.150 of 2018 was filed against the petitioner by a third party, namely, Senthil, who illegally got the property from the third respondent. It appears that based upon the complaint given by the third respondent herein, the second respondent has harassed the petitioner.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P. (MD)No.12888 of 2021

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that based upon the complaint given by the third respondent enquiry was undertaken in C.No.118 of 2021. During the course of enquiry, it was found that it is a partition dispute between the brothers and hence, the parties were advised not to make any trouble or quarrel and on the basis of the advice, the petition was closed on 26.08.2021. In view of the closure of the complaint, nothing survives for consideration or direction.

4. In fine, this petition is disposed of as infructuous. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (WRITS) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) CM Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID19 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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Triunelveli.

3.The Inspector of Police, Anti Land Grabbing (Special cell), Tirunelveli District, Triunelveli.

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

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12888 of 2021 06.09.2021 SRR(CO) SB(22.09.2021) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2