Sudharsanan v. State Of Tamilnadu,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :25.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL CRL. OP(MD). No.20630 of 2024
1. Sudharsanan
2. Santhanakrishnan ... Petitioners Vs.
1. The Commissioner of Police O/o.Commissioner of Police Office Madurai City, Madurai District
2. The Inspector of Police Anna Nagar, All Women Police Station Maduari City, Madurai District
3. S.Kanimozhi ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to direct the second respondent police to not to harass the petitioners without any legally sustainable complaint.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Balamurugapandi For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar No.1 and 2 Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Page No. 1 of 6
O R D E R
This petition has filed by the petitioners to direct the second respondent police to not to harass the petitioners without any legally sustainable complaint.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the third respondent is the wife of the first petitioner and the daughter-in -law of the second petitioner. Due to the family dispute, the third respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioners and based on the complaint the second respondent harassed the petitioners, thereby he filed this petition. During pendency of this petition this Court referred the matter for mediation and the mediation process is going on.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent would submit that the petitioner demanded money from the defacto complainant/third respondent and also used to threaten her, thereby she lodged complaint before the second respondent and the second respondent also conducted enquiry. In the mean time the petitioners filed this petition. The petitioners appeared before the mediation centre and but not co-operated for enquiry. He would further Page No. 2 of 6
submit that the third respondent also filed DVOP No.63 of 2024 before the Additional Mahila Court(Magisterial Level), Madurai and the same is also pending.
4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that based on the complaint given by the third respondent they called the petitioners for enquiry and the respondent police never harassed the petitioners as alleged by them. Therefore nothing survives for further adjudication in this petition and therefore the petition is liable to be dismissed.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record
6. The prayer of the petitioners is to not to harass the petitioners. According to the second respondent based on the complaint given by the third respondent they called the petitioners for enquiry and they have not harassed the petitioners. Further before the mediation centre the matter has not been settled and is pending from 27.11.2024 for more than five months. Further there is no case is pending between the parties. Considering the prayer of the petitioners the mediation process is only a futile exercise. Therefore this Court Page No. 3 of 6
recording the submission of the second respondent that they have not harassed the petitioners and only called the petitioners for enquiry purpose, inclined to dispose of this petition.
7. So far as pending enquiry is concerned, it is for the second respondent to conduct enquiry and dispose of the same within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. With the above direction, the Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.
25.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No aav Page No. 4 of 6
To
1. The Commissioner of Police O/o.Commissioner of Police Office Madurai City, Madurai District
2. The Inspector of Police Anna Nagar, All Women Police Station Maduari City, Madurai District 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Page No. 5 of 6
P.DHANABAL , J.
aav Crl.O.P(MD)No.20630 of 2024 25.03.2025 Page No. 6 of 6