Thirumalaikannan v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.11.2022

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.OP(MD).No.20448 of 2022 Thirumalaikannan : Petitioner Vs.

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

2.The Inspector of Police, Aruppukottai Taluk Police Station, Aruppukottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

3.The Managing Director, Tamilnadu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., Door No.34/123, 6th Floor, Durga Tower, Marshal Road, Chennai-600 008.

4.The Special Tahsildar/Deputy Manager, Tamilnadu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., Virudhunagar. : Respondents Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to direct the 2nd respondent not to interfere in the civil dispute pending between the petitioner and the 4th respondent and not conduct kattapanchayat in the civil dispute at the instance of the 4th respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Mariappan For Respondents : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking for direction to the 2nd respondent not to interfere in the civil dispute pending between the petitioner and the 4th respondent and not conduct kattapanchayat in the civil dispute at the instance of the 4th respondent. 2.The facts in brief:- A complaint has been given by the petitioner against the 4th respondent stating that he conducted a Cable TV operating unit and the Cable TV Corporation was indulged in making threat to pay the subscription amount. In pursuance of the threat made by the Tamil Nadu Cable TV Corporation, they paid Rs.46,071/-, even though the subscribers failed to pay the subscription amount. Because of the above said non-supplying of the signal, the subscribers opted for some other service provided. Now a threat has been made stating that the above said cost for STB box must be remitted by them. To take action against the Government Officials, the above said complaint has been given.

3.Now seeking a direction, this petition has been filed.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would rely upon the order that has been passed in Crl.OP(MD) No.16847 of 2018, wherein it has been stated that the dispute with regard to the service provider and the Cable TV operators cannot be enquired by the police. 5.Now the grievance of the petitioner is that now the police is pressurizing him to remit the amount by illegal means. On the basis of the complaint given by the respondents 3 and 4 herein, the petitioner was directed to appear before the second respondent, on 17/11/2022. 6.Reading of the complaint given by the petitioner as well as the order that was passed by this court in the above said criminal original petition, it is seen that the dispute between the service provider and the Cable TV Operators can be worked out before the concerned forum. 7.

So by following the above said order, it is herein directed that the respondents 1 and 2 may not entertain the above said complaint and that may be closed with a direction to the respondents 3 and 4 to take appropriate action as per law before the concerned authorities. 8.In view of the above, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) submitted that he will advise the second respondent close the complaint.

9.Recording the above said submission, this criminal original petition stands dismissed as unnecessary. 18.11.2022 Internet :Yes/No Internet : Yes/No pnm/er

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

2.The Inspector of Police, Aruppukottai Taluk Police Station, Aruppukottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

3.The Managing Director, Tamilnadu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., Door No.34/123, 6th Floor, Durga Tower, Marshal Road, Chennai-600 008.

4.The Special Tahsildar/Deputy Manager, Tamilnadu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., Virudhunagar.

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

G.ILANGOVAN ,J.

pnm/er Crl.OP.(MD).No.20448 of 2022 18/11/2022