Disposed

Kursheet Sherif @ Akshar v. State Rep. by

Madras HC2 Feb 2016CRL OP/1493/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought relief under Section 482 CrPC to prevent police harassment during a pending trial. The Court directed the police not to harass but to investigate in accordance with law, citing D.K. Basu guidelines, and allowing summons for interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry but to investigate the matter in accordance with law, permitting police to issue summon for interrogation.

Kursheet Sherif @ Akshar Vs State Rep. by — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 02.02.2016

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.MALA

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.1493 of 2016

¶6

Kursheet Sherif @ Akshar .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State rep. by The Inspector of Police Crimes,

¶9

E1 Mylapore Police Station Chennai – 4. Crime No.3017 of 2015 .. Respondent

¶10

Prayer:-Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the respondent police not to harass the petitioner, pending trial in C.C.No.5720 of 2015 on the file of the XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai – 15.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.C.V.Kumar

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.C.Emalias Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER

¶13

Heard both sides.

¶14

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent is harassing the petitioner under the guise of enquiry and hence, the petitioner has come forward with this petition for the above stated relief.

¶15

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner is arrayed as accused in Crime No.3017 of 2015, for the offences punishable under Section 392 of Indian Penal Code.

¶16

Considering the rival submissions made on both sides, the respondent is directed not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry, but let the police investigate into the matter in accordance with law and the mandates as found set out in D.K.Basu Vs. State of West Bengal reported in AIR (1997) SC 610.

¶17

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

¶18

If really, the police want to interrogate, it is open for the police to issue summons to the petitioner. Thereupon, the petitioner shall appear before the police and submit him for interrogation.

¶19

The Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with the above direction.

¶20

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
cse
To
1.The Inspector of Police
Crimes,
E1 Mylapore Police Station
Chennai – 4.
2.The Public Prosecutor
High Court, Chennai.
Crl.O.P.No.1493 of 2016
NM(CO)
EU 12.02.16

¶21

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

Kursheet Sherif @ Akshar v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kursheet Sherif @ Akshar v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muhammed Mehsheer Vs E.v.Sherin Farhana

Shyamala, S/O. Ravi Vs State the Deputy Commissioner

His Holiness Kasiviswanatha Vs the Inspector of Police

A.Ronald Santha Kumar Vs the State Rep by

D.Gopalakrishnan Vs R.J.Veeraraghavan

K.Sidda Reddy Vs the Inspector of Police