Disposed

Er.J.Arunpaul M.E., Phd., v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC23 Jun 2017CRL OP(MD)/7520/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court closed the criminal original petition seeking protection from harassment during a complaint inquiry, directing the police to refrain from unnecessary harassment absent a cognizable offence.

What did the court decide?

Attempted to close the petition and direct the police not to harass the petitioner unnecessarily unless there is any cognizable offence.

Er.J.Arunpaul M.E., Phd., Vs the Inspector of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.06.2017

¶3

CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Crl.O.P.(MD) No.7520 of 2017

¶4

Er.J.Arunpaul : Petitioner

¶5

-vs-

¶6

1.State of Tamil Nadu

¶7

Represented by, The Inspector of Police, Arumanai Police Station, Vilavancode Taluk, Kanyakumari District, CSR No.151/2017.

¶8

2.Er.S.Shyba : Respondents

¶9

Prayer : Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, directing the first respondent not to harass the petitioner any further on the basis of CSR No.151 of 2017.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Titus

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.K.Anbarasan for R1 Government Advocate (Crl.side)

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

It is seen that the petitioner got married to Shyba, the second respondent on 17.05.2014 and they were living happily. They are not blessed with children. The parties were undergoing some medical tests. It is alleged that Shyba's father Selvaraj had given a complaint against the petitioner, in which petition enquiry was conducted in CSR No.151 of 2017 and the same was closed on 03.04.2017.

¶14

Mr.K.S.Vijaya Kumar, Special Sub Inspector of Police, Arumanai Police Station, Vilavancode Taluk, Kanyakumari District, is present. The learned Government Advocate on instructions submitted that apart from that complaint, there is no other complaint pending on the file of the first respondent either from Shyba or from Selvaraj.

¶15

Recording the same, this criminal original petition is closed with a direction to the first respondent police not to harass the petitioner unnecessarily unless there is any cognizable offence. Sd/-

¶16

Assistant Registrar(Protocol)

¶17

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

¶18

/True Copy/

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

To:

¶21

1.The Inspector of Police, Arumanai Police Station, Vilavancode Taluk, Kanyakumari District.

¶22

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

¶23

+1cc to Mr.S.TITUS Advocate in SR. No.61807 JIKR JS/MR/KKR/SAR.3/2P-4C/7.7.2017

¶24

Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.7520 of 2017 23.06.2017

¶25

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

Er.J.Arunpaul M.E., Phd., v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Er.J.Arunpaul M.E., Phd., v. the Inspector 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

T. Chezhiyan Vs A.K. Abinayasri

R. Tiruvidam Vs A.K. Abinayasri

Rajendran, Vs State, Rep by

Murugan Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

Karthikeyan Vs the Inspector of Police

Selvaraj Vs the Deputy Superintendent of