Disposed

M/S.Ideal Drymixes (India) Pvt. v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC5 Feb 2016CRL OP/1689/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Criminal Original Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Madras High Court directed respondents police not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry. The court mandated that investigations must follow legal mandates and cited D.K. Basu case, allowing summons for interrogation upon applicable requests.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents not to harass petitioner under guise of enquiry; police to investigate in accordance with law including D.K. Basu mandates.

M/S.Ideal Drymixes (India) Pvt. Vs the… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 05.02.2016

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.MALA

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.1689 of 2016

¶6

M/s.Ideal Drymixes (India) Pvt. Ltd., Rep. By its Manager, V.R.Raghnandanan, S.F.No.247/2, Karuppur Main Road, Manavasai Village & P.O., K.R.Puram Union & Taluk, Karur District. .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Ram Nagar, Powai, Coimbatore, Coimbatore Rural, Tamil Nadu – 641 018. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Krishnagiri District, Tamil Nadu – 635 001. 3.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, Tamil Nadu – 629 001. .. Respondents

¶8

Prayer:-Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the respondents and their subordinate officers not to harass the petitioner in any manner known to law, under the guise of making an enquiry.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Bijai Sundar For Respondents : Mr.C.Emalias Additional Public Prosecutor

¶10

ORDER

¶11

The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for a direction, directing the respondents and their subordinates not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

¶12

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has obtained license for manufacturing using the raw materials such as river sand, quarry waste (rock powder), lime, cement, fly ash and polymers. But the respondent

¶13

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

¶14

police without any authority interfering with the business and harassing the petitioner. Hence, he pray for direction directing the respondent police not to harass the petitioner.

¶15

3.At this juncture, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is transporting the products to other States. He further submitted that the petitioner had license only to do business in the State of Tamil Nadu, which was evidenced by page No.6 of the typed set of papers. But he fairly conceded that they have not registered any case against the petitioner.

¶16

4.Recording the submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the respondents are 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. 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.

¶17

5.The Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with the
above direction.
-s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CSVII)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
cse
To
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Ram Nagar, Powai,
Coimbatore, Coimbatore Rural,
Tamil Nadu – 641 018.
2.The Superintendent of Police,
Krishnagiri District, Tamil Nadu – 635 001.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Kanyakumari District, Tamil Nadu – 629 001.

¶18

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

¶19

4.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Chennai.

¶20

+1 cc to M/s.K. Bijai Sundar Advocate sr.4606

¶21

Crl.O.P.No.1689 of 2016

¶22

sal(co)
aa15/02/2016

¶23

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

M/S.Ideal Drymixes (India) Pvt. v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Ideal Drymixes (India) Pvt. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Thirunavukkarasu Vs the State Rep. by

S.Suguna Vs State by

D.Murugesan Vs the Inspector of Police

Uma Bhuvaneswari Vs the Superintendent of Police

J.Thahir Ahmed Vs State Rep. by

P.Manickam Vs the Inspector of Police