P.Usha Devi v. The Commissioner Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.07.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN Crl.O.P.(MD) No.12327 of 2023 P.Usha Devi ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Commissioner of Police, City Crime Branch, Madurai.
2.The Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai.
3.The Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch, Madurai District.
4.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, (Land Grabbing), Madurai District.
5.The Inspector of Police, Nagamalaipudukottai police station, Madurai.
6.Vivek 7.M.Pandi Sekar ..Respondents 1/6
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to direct the respondents 1 to 5, to not to harass the petitioner in the name of false complaint.
For Petitioner : Mr.W.Pamelin For R1 to R5 : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate Crl.Side) O RDER This Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking for a direction to the police not to harass the petitioner.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a retired professor of 69 years old and she has given a complaint to the third respondent that respondents 6 and 7 have cheated her to the tune of Rs.2 1/2 Crores and it is further submitted that on a complaint given by the seventh respondent, the police are harassing her.
3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that there are about 5 complaints received against the petitioner who has been doing money lending business with exorbitant rate of interest, without having proper licence for doing money lending business. It is also submitted that a case has been registered on a complaint by the fourth 2/6
respondent in Crime No.13 of 2023 against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 120B, 406, 420, 294(b), 506(1) of IPC and Section 4 of Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2003 and that three more complaints have come against her and all of them were enquired and closed. Another complaint also came before the Sindhupatti police station and another criminal case has been registered against the petitioner.
4. According to the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), no application is pending against the petitioner except two criminal cases in where the petitioner has to appear for enquiry. The Sindhupatti police station and also the fourth respondent police station have been proceeding with the investigation in the respective complaints.
5. It is orally submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that one Manimaran, Writer in the District Crime Branch, has been calling the petitioner only through whatsapp. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submits that the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner are incorrect and there is no mention about the said allegation in the affidavit filed along with this petition. 3/6
6. The same is recorded. Considering the circumstances, since there are cases against the petitioner, there is no specific complaint has been mentioned in the petition, this petition seeking for not to harass, is liable to be closed. Hence, the respondent police are directed not to harass the petitioner except proceeding as per law during the course of investigation.
7. This Criminal original Petition is closed. 10.07.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No pnn 4/6
To 1.The Commissioner of Police, City Crime Branch, Madurai. 2.The Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai. 3.The Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch, Madurai District. 4.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, (Land Grabbing), Madurai District.
5.The Inspector of Police, Nagamalaipudukottai police station, Madurai. 6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6
DR.D.NAGARJUN. J.
pnn 10.07.2023 6/6