S.Dinesh v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Crl. O.P(MD) No. 22956 of 2025 S.Dinesh ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep By, The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch, Dindigul District.

3. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Dindigul District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 to direct the third respondent not to harass the petitioner and his family members in any manner in the guise of enquiry, by considering his representation dated 01.12.2025.

Page No. 1 of 5

For petitioner :Mr. J.Jawahar For Respondent :Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Mr.Ananda Padmanabhan Senior Counsel for M/s.APN Law Associates for defacto complainant.

*****

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking a direction to the third respondent not to harass the petitioner and his family members under the guise of enquiry, by considering his representation dated 01.12.2025.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is continuously harassed by the third respondent police and sought the indulgence of this Court.

3. The learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Ananda Padmanabhan appearing for the de facto complainant, emphatically submitted that the petitioner is not unnecessarily harassed by the police and he was only Page No. 2 of 5

summoned to appear for enquiry before the third respondent police in a matter where he had deceived the de facto complainant to the tune of Rs.80,00,000/- on the promise that he would purchase machineries for the de facto complianant's factory during the year 2017 and 2018. In the interregnum, the petitioner had obtained Rs.12,00,000/- from the de facto complainant and had returned Rs.9,00,000/- and only because of that, particular gesture, believing him, the de facto complainant had extended to come forward and given a huge amount of Rs.80,00,000/- to the petitioner for purchase of machinery. However, on 28/5/2018, he absconded. Later, the de facto complainant came to know that the petitioner had come back during September 2025, following which he had lodged a complaint on 24/9/2025 and in this regard, the police had called the petitioner for enquiry on 25/10/2025 and on 02/12/2025. However, without cooperating with the enquiry, he had come before this Court seeking the indulgence of this Court and sought dismissal of this petition.

4. Considering the same, this Court is of the view that the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court to protect himself from the enquiry and I do not find any merit in the petitioner's case. Hence, directing the Page No. 3 of 5

petitioner to cooperate with the enquiry this Criminal Original Petition is closed.

15.12.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch, Dindigul District.

3. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Dindigul District.

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

Page No. 4 of 5

L.VICTORIA GOWRI,J apd Crl O.P.(MD) No. 22956 of 2025 15.12.2025 Page No. 5 of 5