Dismissed

C.K.Balasundaram v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC2 Jun 2016CRL OP/10159/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal original petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought a direction to police respondents not to harass the petitioners. The Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners were not required for further enquiry after the police had completed the necessary investigation. The High Court recorded the submissions and closed the petition without issuing any mandatory direction.

What did the court decide?

Petition closed without any order directing the police not to harass the petitioners.

C.K.Balasundaram Vs the Superintendent of Police — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 02.06.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶5

CRL.OP.No.10159 OF 2016

¶6

1.C.K.Balasundaram 2.S.Bakyalakshmi 3.B.Chandrasekaran 4.B.Vetriselvan 5.B.Manimaran 6.B.Kalaiselvi 7.B.Sumathi 8.S.Ganasekaran 9.A.Vasugi 10.S.Kumaresan 11.S.Sadhanandham 12.S.Ganapathy ... Petitioners Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Collectorate Compound, Kancheepuram.

¶7

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Ekambara Sannathi Street, Big Kancheepuram. 3.The Inspector of Police, B1, Sivakanchi Police Station, Kancheepuram.

¶8

4.The Inspector of Police, B-2, Vishnukanchi Police Station, Kancheepuram. ... Respondents

¶9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioners.

¶11

For Petitioners : Mr.S.N.A.Hussainy

¶12

For Respondents : Mr.C.Emalias, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This petition has been filed to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioners.

¶15

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners; learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents and perused the materials placed on record.

¶16

When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that a case in Crime No.117 of 2016 for man missing was initially registered by the 3^rd respondent-police and later altered to Section 302 IPC. During the course of investigation, the police wanted to enquire the petitioners. It is further represented that the petitioners appeared before the police for enquiry and the petitioners are not required for further enquiry.

¶17

Recording the submissions of the learned Additional
Public Prosecutor, this petition is closed.
s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-III)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
gya
To

¶18

1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Collectorate Compound, Kancheepuram.

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶20

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Ekambara Sannathi Street, Big Kancheepuram.

¶21

3.The Inspector of Police, B1, Sivakanchi Police Station, Kancheepuram.

¶22

4.The Inspector of Police, B-2, Vishnukanchi Police Station, Kancheepuram. 5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. +1 cc to M/s.S.N.A.Hussainy Advocate sr.29426/16 CRL.OP.No.10159 OF 2016 aa14/06/2016

¶23

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

C.K.Balasundaram v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.K.Balasundaram v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.C.Raajabasu @ P.C.Baskar Vs the Inspector of Police

G.Riaz Ahmed Vs the Inspector of Police

Sathya Vs State by

S.Gnanakumar @ Babu Vs the Inspector of Police

D.Vimalanathan Vs the Superintendent of Police

M.Annamalai, Vs the Superintendent of Police