S.Ganesan v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.12.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU S.Ganesan ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
2.The Inspector of police, Sattur Police Station, Sattur, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Sriram Transport Finance Company Ltd, Represented by its Manager Old No.30, New No.26, potter Street, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 015.
4.The Sriram Transport Finance Company Ltd, Represented by its Manager, No.27/5 Simma Towers, 1st Floor, Ettayapuram Road, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District - 628 501.
... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry on the basis of petitioner's representation dated 20.10.2020.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Arunraj For R1 & R2 : Mr.V.Neelakandan, Additional Public Prosecutor(Crl.Side)
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry on the basis of petitioner's representation dated 20.10.2020.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has purchased a second hand Innova Car bearing Reg.No.TN 22 BC 1892, from Aathavan Car dealers, Chennai for 1/3
a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- through the 3rd respondent herein and paid Rs.4,00,000/-. For non-payment of the balance amount, the 3rd respondent seized the Car from the petitioner in the year 2013. The grievance of the petitioner is that eventhough the petitioner produced documents to the 4th respondent, they continuously harass the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner sent representation to the 1st and 2nd respondents on 20.10.2020. But no action has been taken. Hence, this petition.
3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent police, on instructions, would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, enquiry was conducted and during the enquiry, the petitioner had given a statement that he will approach the appropriate Forum for his remedy and no further action is necessary against his complaint. Accordingly, the complaint was closed on 18.11.2020. 4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the official respondents.
5.Recording the above submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor,(Crl.side), this Criminal Original Petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AD-II) // 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, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
2/3
2.The Inspector of police, Sattur Police Station, Sattur, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
14.12.2020 VB (07.01.2021) 3P 4C 3/3