Dismissed

Saravanan v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC6 Jul 2016CRL OP/12954/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal original petition, the Madras High Court directed the 1st petitioner to cooperate with police enquiry concerning an unnamed relative, forbidding harassment during the process, while clarifying this order is not a shield against arrest if a cognizable offence is made out.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner 1 directed to cooperate with enquiry without harassment; police free to register FIR and arrest if cognizable offence made out.

Saravanan Vs the Superintendent of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 06.07.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶5

CRL.OP.No.12954 of 2016

¶6

1.Saravanan
2.S.Anuradha
3.M.Parimala
4.S.Kavitha
5.S.Ananthi ... Petitioners
Vs

¶7

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

¶8

2.The Inspector of Police, Vellore South Police Station, Vellore .... Respondents Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 2^nd respondent not to harass the petitioners and not to interfere with the petitioner's road side, Aaya Hotel, Kadpadi Road, Viruthampattu, Vellore. For Petitioners : Mr.I.Abraham For Respondents : Mr.C.Emalias, APP O R D E R

¶9

This petition has been filed to direct the 2^nd respondent not to harass the petitioners and not to interfere with the petitioner's road side, Aaya Hotel, Kadpadi Road, Viruthampattu, Vellore.

¶10

When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the police are on lookout of one Vasur Raja, who is said to be the relative of the 1^st petitioner and therefore, the 1^st petitioner was called for enquiry to find whereabouts of the said Vasur Raja.

¶11

Learned Additional Prosecutor further submitted that petitioners 2 to 5 are not at all required for enquiry.

¶12

In view of the above, the 1^st petitioner is directed to coopearte with the police for enquiry and at the time of conducting enquiry, he shall not be harassed. During the course of enquiry, if https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ any cognizable offence is made out, the 2^nd respondent police is free

¶13

to register an FIR and this order shall not be a shield for the petitioners against arrest.

¶14

With the above direction, this petition is closed.

¶15

Sd/-
Asst.Registrar
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
gya
To
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Vellore District, Vellore.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Vellore South Police Station,
Vellore.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
CO-RK
ths : 02.08.2016
CRL.OP.No.12954 of 2016

¶16

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

Saravanan v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saravanan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Manoharan Vs the Inspector of Police

Sivalingam, Vs State Rep. by Inspector of

Mrs. Philomina George, Vs the Inspector of Police

Laborate Pharmaceuticals Vs State Rep. by the Drugs

G Karunanidhi Vs Mr Iyyanarappan

Champalal P.Ranawat Vs Ravi Kumar