Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/11093/2019disposed of

Kavinraj v. The Director General Of Police

2019-08-07Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 07.08.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN CRL.O.P.(MD).No.11093 of 2019 Kavinraj : Petitioner Vs.

1.The Director General of Police, Beach Road, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.

2.The Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai.

3.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

4.State rep.by the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Ramanathapuram District.

: Respondents PRAYER : Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to direct the fourth respondent not to harass the petitioner and his family members in the guise of enquiry on the basis of the representation of the petitioner dated 22.07.2019. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Anandakumar For Respondents : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

This petition has been filed to direct the fourth respondent not to harass the petitioner and his family members.

2. According to the petitioner, due to money dispute between the petitioner and one Govindaraj, based on the complaint given by the said Govindaraj, the fourth respondent police detained the petitioner and also harassed the petitioner to repay the amount and also obtained his signature forcibly in a blank stamp paper. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present petition.

3. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that based on the complaint given by one Govindaraj, enquiry has been conducted by the fourth respondent, in which the petitioner has appeared and given an undertaking that he https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

will repay the amount on or before 30.07.2019. Recording the same, the complaint has been closed. He would further submit that the respondent police has not harassed the petitioner.

4. This statement was disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that even after closing the complaint, the fourth respondent police has illegally detained the petitioner and also harassed him.

5. Considering the fact that already the complaint lodged by one Govindaraj against the petitioner has been enquired into and closed, the fourth respondent police is directed not to harass the petitioner.

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

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) To

1. The Director General of Police, Beach Road, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.

2. The Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

4. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Ramanathapuram District.

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

+1 CC to Mr.N.ANANDA KUMAR, Advocate ( SR-80712[F] dated 08/08/2019 ) CRL.O.P.(MD).No.11093 of 2019 07.08.2019 ta MK (28.08.2019) 2P 7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/