M.Nagarajan v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 20.08.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN CRL.O.P.(MD).No.11575 of 2019 M.Nagarajan : Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.the Superintendent of Police Sivagangai District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Manamadurai Town Police Station, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District.
3.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Manamadurai Town Police Station, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District.
4.S.Sivakumar : Respondents PRAYER : Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to direct the third respondent not to harass the petitioner in the name of enquiry.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.M.Arumugam For R1 to R3 : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
This petition has been filed to direct the third respondent not to harass the petitioner.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the official respondents. Considering the nature of the order going to be passed in this petition, notice to the fourth respondent is dispensed with.
3. According to the petitioner, due to some money dispute, the 1/3
fourth respondent is said to have given a complaint against the petitioner before the second respondent. Now based on the said complaint, the second respondent police is harassing the petitioner under the guise of enquiry. Hence, the present petition has been filed.
4. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that already based on the complaint given by the fourth respondent an enquiry has been conducted. Since the enquiry reveals that the the dispute between the parties is civil in nature, the respondent police has closed the complaint directing the parties to approach the civil forum. He would further submit that the respondent police has not harassed the petitioner.
5. The statement made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) is recorded. Considering the fact that the complaint given by the fourth respondent against the petitioner has been enquired into and closed as civil dispute, the respondent police is directed not to harass the petitioner.
6. This Criminal Original Petition is closed accordingly. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CRL.SIDE) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To 1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.the Superintendent of Police Sivagangai District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Manamadurai Town Police Station, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District.
3.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Manamadurai Town Police Station, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District.
2/3
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1 CC to M/s.C.M. ARUMUGAM, Advocate ( SR-82752[F] dated 21/08/2019 ) TA Order made in CRL.O.P.(MD).No.11575 of 2019 Dated:
20.08.2019 KM/(04.09.2019) 3P 6C 3/3