Sarabanu v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.10.2021 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Sarabanu ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Rameswaram Sub Division, Rameswaram, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Mandapam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

4.Bhavani ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the 3rd respondent not to harass the petitioner and her son in the guise of enquiry colluded with the 4th respondent without following procedure of law. For Petitioners : Mr.T.Veerakumar For Respondents : Mr.R.M.S.Sethuraman for R1 to R3 Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking direction to the the 3rd respondent not to harass the petitioner and her son in the guise of enquiry colluded with the 4th respondent without following procedure of law.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has borrowed loan from the 4th respondent and claiming exorbitant interest, the 4th respondent harassing the petitioner 1/3

with hench men and illegally taken away the petitioner's son's vehicle TATA ACE bearing registration No.TN-65-AM-2020, by criminally trespassing into the house. During the course of enquiry, the third respondent pressurised the petitioner to settle the amount to the fourth respondent.

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that based upon the complaint given by one Kannan against Barathiraja, enquiry was undertaken in CSR.No.59 of 2021 and during the course of enquiry, compromise was reached between the parties, based on which, it was closed. Again the complainant namely Kannan has given another complaint, which is also pending. 4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the above said Kannan is adopted son of the petitioner, based upon the complaint given, harassment is made by the second respondent. 5.Since already a compromise reached between the parties, repeated complaint by the son of the petitioner may not be proper. If any trouble arises between the parties, the petitioner has to give proper complaint before competent authority. In stead of that unnecessary and repeated complaints given by the above said Kannan is not proper.

6.Let the third respondent may close the present complaint given by Kannan by directing the petitioner to workout his remedy before the competent forum.

7.With the above said direction and liberty, this criminal original petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) TM 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. 2/3

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Rameswaram Sub Division, Rameswaram, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Mandapam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

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

+1 CC to M/s.T. VEERAKUMAR, Advocate ( SR-32688[F] dated 26/10/2021 ) 22.10.2021 RK/PM(25/11/2021) 3P 6C 3/3