← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/11701/2019disposed of

Rengalakshmi v. The Superintendent Of Police

2019-08-22Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.08.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN Rengalakshmi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.State represented through The Superintendent of Police, O/o.Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Tahsildar, O/o. Tiruvengadam Taluk Office, Tiruvengadam, Tirunelveli District.

4.The Inspector of Police, Thiruvengadam Police Station, Thiruvengadam, Tirunelveli District.

5.Karuppasamy 6.Selvaraj 7.Kandhasamy 8.Jeyabharathi 9.Saranya

...Respondents

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to direct the respondent No.4 and 5 not to harass the petitioner and his family members in the name of foisting false case.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ponraj For R1 to R4 : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/4

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking direction to the fourth and fifth respondents not to harass the petitioner and his family members.

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 private respondents herein is dispensed with.

3. According to the petitioner, there is a civil dispute between the petitioner and the sixth respondent in respect of a pathway. Now based on the complaint given by the fifth and sixth respondents, the fourth respondent police is harassing the petitioner. 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 official respondents, on instructions, would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner enquiry has been conducted by the fourth respondent police. During enquiry, both the petitioner and the fifth and sixth respondents appeared before the respondent police and given a statement that they will measure the property in question with the help of a Surveyor and resolve the dispute between them. Recording the same, the complaint was closed.

5. To this, the learned counsel for the petitioner replied that the petitioner has not given any such statement before the respondent police and still the fourth respondent is harassing the petitioner supporting the fifth and sixth respondents.

6. Considering the fact that it is only a civil dispute between the parties, the respondent police should not interfere with the same and it is for the parties concerned to resolve the dispute before the concerned civil forum and the fourth respondent is directed not to interfere with the civil dispute pending between the parties.

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

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AS) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar 2/4

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Tahsildar, O/o. Tiruvengadam Taluk Office, Tiruvengadam, Tirunelveli District.

4.The Inspector of Police, Thiruvengadam Police Station, Thiruvengadam, Tirunelveli District.

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

+1 CC to M/s.P.PONRAJ, Advocate ( SR-83121[F] dated 22/08/2019 ) 22.08.2019 ta MS/04.09.2019/3P.7C 3/4