S.Ramasamy v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26.07.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13347 of 2023 1.S.Ramasamy 2.Dr.MR.Muthiah ... Petitioners Vs.

1.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Dindigul District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Tallakulam Police Station, Madurai City.

3.The Inspector of Police, Anna Nagar (Crime) Police Station, Madurai City.

4.RM.Sathappan 5.S.Hemalatha 6.S.Premalatha ..Respondents 1/5

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to direct the first respondent Police not to harass the petitioners in the name of enquiry even after closing the very same complaint by the second respondent made by the fourth respondent and consequently direct the first respondent to close the complaint against the petitioners based on the reply dated 20.03.2019.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.M.Arun Swaminathan For Respondents : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 to R3 Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian for R4 to R6 O RDER This Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking for a direction to the first respondent Police not to harass the petitioners in the name of enquiry on a complaint allegedly to have been given by the fourth respondent.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the issue between the petitioners and the fourth respondent is purely civil in nature and earlier, the fourth respondent has given a complaint before the first respondent and said complaint was 2/5

closed. Thereafter, again similar complaint was given to the second respondent and after enquiry, the said complaint was also been closed. Finally, one more complaint has been given in the same line to the third respondent and the notice has been issued to the petitioners on 11.03.2023 directing them to appear before the Police on 13.03.2023. Again, the fourth respondent has stated to have given one more complaint before the first respondent. It is further submitted that the fourth respondent is in the habit of making the complaint from one Police Station to other Police Station. Thereby, the petitioners are put to loss of harassment.

3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents submits that the first respondent is not aware of the fact that earlier the fourth respondent has given three similar complaints and after conducting enquiry, they were closed.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 4 to 6 requests time. The same is declined as the grievance of the petitioner is not against the unofficial respondents but against the respondents Police. 3/5

5. Considering the circumstances, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of directing the petitioners to appear either in person or through their representative on 05.08.2023 by way of written submission at 11.00 a.m. before the first respondent, on which, the first respondent Police is directed the consider the representation of the fourth respondent and dispose of the same on or before 16.08.2023. Index : Yes/No 26.07.2023 Internet : Yes/No ssb To 1.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Dindigul District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Tallakulam Police Station, Madurai City.

3.The Inspector of Police, Anna Nagar (Crime) Police Station, Madurai City.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 4/5

DR.D.NAGARJUN. J.

ssb 26.07.2023 5/5