K.Vijayakumar v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.09.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN K.Vijayakumar ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police D.P.O, K.Pudur, Madurai District.

2.The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch, Madurai, Madurai District.

3.The Inspector of Police Melur Police Station, Madurai District.

4.R.Kasi 5.Balakrishnan .. Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying, to direct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry or investigation under the false afterthought complaint given by the fifth respondent projecting as caretaker of fourth respondent and desist the second respondent from involving any kind of harassments and illegal activities towards the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Siva Ilayaraja For Respondents : Mr.SS.Madhavan, - for R1 to R3 Government Advocate (Criminal) Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian - for R5 1/4

O R D E R

This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking for a direction to the second respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry on the basis of a false complaint given by the fifth respondent.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent No.4 has sold the immovable properties to the petitioner under the registered sale deed. Subsequently, respondent No.5 has filed a complaint before the respondent Police stating that respondent No.4 has executed an agreement of sale in his favour in respect of the same property and without executing the sale deed, he has sold the property in favour of the petitioner by way of a registered sale deed, dated 10.03.2023 and basing on the said complaint, the second respondent Police stated to have harassed the petitioner.

3. Mr.Ganapathi Subramanian, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the fifth respondent submits that he has filed a complaint before the respondent Police and enquiry is going on.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submits that basing on a complaint given by respondent No.5, the District Crime Branch are enquiring into the same and within a short time, they will complete the enquiry. 2/4

5. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the fifth respondent as well as the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) and on perusal of records, it is clear that the dispute between the petitioner and unofficial respondents 4 and 5 is purely civil in nature, in case, if the respondent No.5 has got any grievance against respondent No.4 for executing the registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner without honouring the agreement of sale, the only course left for the fifth respondent is to file appropriate civil suit in the Civil Court. Even if there is any element of criminality can be attributed to the petitioner because it is the fourth respondent, who has not executed the sale deed in favour of the fifth respondent, the petitioner can be an innocent purchaser. Therefore, the respondent Police are not to interfere this kind of dispute.

6. This petition is therefore disposed of directing the respondent Police to complete the enquiry on the complaint given by the fifth respondent as quickly as possible not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

11.09.2023 NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no tsg 3/4

DR.D.NAGARJUN, J.

tsg To 1.The Superintendent of Police D.P.O, K.Pudur, Madurai District.

2.The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch, Madurai, Madurai District.

3.The Inspector of Police Melur Police Station, Madurai District.

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

11.09.2023 4/4