S.Kavitha v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.10.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18977 of 2023 S.Kavitha

...Petitioner / Petitioner

Vs.

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

2.The Inspector of Police, Kallimanthaiyam Police Station, Kallimanthaiyam, Dindigul District.

3.M/s.JSW Renew Energy Limited, Rep. through its Authorized Signatory, JSW Centre, Bandrakula Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051.

Maharashtra.

4.C.M.AGRI FARM Private Limited, 1/6

Rep. through its Authorized Signatory, D.No.11A, CM Tower, Near Railway Station, Rajendra Road, Udumalaipettai-642 126.

Tiruppur District.

...Respondents

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to direct the 2nd respondent herein not to harass the petitioner in the guise of enquiry and consider petitioner's representation dated 10.10.2023. For Petitioner :Mr.S.Pugalendhi For Respondent :Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar for R1 & R2 Government Advocate (Crl. Side) :Mr.N.Dilip Kumar for R3 :Mr.D.Kirubakaran for R4 O RDER This petition is filed seeking direction to the second respondent not to interfere in the civil dispute between the parties.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that under the guise of getting lease agreement, a release deed was obtained from the husband of this petitioner. Over the above said issue, a suit in O.S.No.153 of 2023 was filed by the husband of the petitioner before the Sub Court, Oddanchathiram, arraying that respondents 2 to 4 as defendants. The above said 2/6

suit has been filed seeking declaration of the above said release deed, dated 19.04.2022 as null and void.

3.Pending the said suit, it appears that the property was sold to the third respondent herein and the third respondent proposed to set up the windmill. At the time of levelling the ground and laying pathway trouble was created by this petitioner. Over which, the third respondent gave a complaint before the second respondent. In the above said complaint, notice was ordered to the husband of the petitioner. When the husband never turned up, making allegation against the second respondent representation has been made. 4.Since the civil dispute is pending between the parties, it must be tried to his logical conclusion. With regard to the said complaint given by the third respondent, it shall be enquired on its own merits, by the second respondent, who is the competent authority. Let the said enquiry be completed within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any trouble arises during the course of enquiry, the petitioner can workout his remedy through appropriate proceedings.

3/6

5.With the above said directions, this criminal original petition is disposed of.

Speaking : Yes / No 20.10.2023 NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No VSG To 1.The Superintendent of Police, 4/6

Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kallimanthaiyam Police Station, Kallimanthaiyam, Dindigul District.

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

5/6

G.ILANGOVAN. J.

VSG Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18977 of 2023 20.10.2023 6/6