Disposed

G.Esakkimuthu v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC20 Aug 2018CRL OP(MD)/1879/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a Criminal Original Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking directions to prevent police harassment. The Court directed the petitioner to cooperate with the pending preliminary enquiry while ensuring he is not harassed, citing Supreme Court guidelines on preliminary enquiries and their limitations.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to cooperate with police enquiry without harassment; police restricted from calling petitioner regularly without FIR.

G.Esakkimuthu Vs the Superintendent of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 20.08.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1879 of 2018 and Crl.M.P.[MD].No.961 of 2018

¶7

G.Esakkimuthu ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Superintendent of Police, District Police Office, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶10

The Inspector of Police, Town Police Station, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

¶11

The Inspector of Police, AWPS, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to direct the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents not to harass the petitioner and his family members on the basis of the false complaint lodged by the petitioner's wife against the petitioner and his family members and to direct the second and 3^rd respondents to follow guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in D.K.Basu 1997 1 SCC 416 case in matters pertaining to arrest or interrogation.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Maran For Respondents : Mr.M.Chandrasekaran Additional Public Prosecutor

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents herein not to harass the petitioner in name of enquiry without due process of law.

¶16

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

¶17

¶18

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police submits that on the complaint given by the defacto complainant against the petitioner, petition enquiry is pending in C.S.R. No.41 of 2018 on the file of the respondent police.

¶19

The petitioner is directed to cooperate with the police for enquiry and at the time of conducting of the enquiry, the petitioner shall not be harassed by the police. The police cannot call the petitioner on a regular basis in the guise of enquiry without even registering an FIR and Supreme Court of India in Lalitha Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh reported in 2013 (6) CTC 353 has enumerated the nature of cases where preliminary enquiry can be conducted and has also restricted the period, for which preliminary enquiry can be conducted. During the course of enquiry, if any cognizable offence is made out, first respondent is free to register an FIR and this order shall not be a shield for the petitioner against the respondent proceeding to take action in accordance with law.

¶20

With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is closed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶21

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-I)

¶22

/True Copy/

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

¶24

¶25

The Superintendent of Police, District Police Office, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶26

The Inspector of Police, Town Police Station, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

¶27

The Inspector of Police,

¶28

AWPS, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

¶29

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

¶30

SJI

¶31

TE/JM/SV/SAR-3 : 12/09/2018 : 2P/5C

¶32

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

¶33

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1879 of 2018 and Crl.M.P.[MD].No.961 of 2018 20.08.2018

G.Esakkimuthu v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Esakkimuthu 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

S. Nagarathinam Vs the Superintendent of Police

Murugavel Vs the Commissioner of Police

A.Natarajan Vs the Superintendent of Police

A.Ajin Sankar Vs the Superintendent of Police

Purappan Vs the Inspector of Police

Anto Selvan Vs the Sub-Inspector of Police