Disposed

Vetrichelvan v. the Commissioner of Police

Madras HC9 May 2019CRL OP/12712/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Original Petition sought directions to prevent harassment by the police during a pending preliminary enquiry. The bench directed the petitioners to cooperate with the enquiry, restricted summoning practices, and clarified that this order does not bar future FIR registration if a cognizable offence is made out.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioners to cooperate with the enquiry; directed police not to summarously harass them by regular summoning before FIR registration.

Vetrichelvan Vs the Commissioner of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 09.05.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶5

CRL.O.P.No.12712 of 2019

¶6

Vetrichelvan
2. Sasitha.V .. Petitioners
-vs-
1.The Commissioner of Police,
Vepery, Chennai.
2. State rep. by:
The Inspector of Police,
R-7, K.K.Nagar Police Station,
(Crime and Law and Order)
Chennai. .. Respondents

¶7

Prayer: Criminal Original petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioners.

¶8

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Sarath Chandran For Respondents : Ms.M.Prabhavathi Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER

¶9

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the respondent police not to harass the petitioners under the guise of enquiry.

¶10

2.Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

¶11

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police submits that on the complaint given by the defacto complainant against the petitioners, petition enquiry is pending in C.No.245 of 2019 on the file of the first respondent.

¶12

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

¶13

4.The petitioners are directed to cooperate with the police for enquiry and at the time of conducting of the enquiry, the petitioners shall not be harassed by the police. The police cannot call the petitioners 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, second respondent is free to register an FIR and this order shall not be a shield for the petitioners against the respondent proceeding to take action in accordance with law.

¶14

5.With the above directions, the Criminal Original Petition
is closed.
s/d-
Assistant Registrar(VO)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
dh
To
1.The Commissioner of Police,
Vepery, Chennai.
2. The Inspector of Police,
R-7, K.K.Nagar Police Station,
(Crime and Law and Order)
Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1 CC to Mr.S.Sarath Chandran, Advocate sr 43542.
CRL.O.P.No.12712 of 2019
GJII(CO)
SP(16/05/2019)

¶15

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

Vetrichelvan v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vetrichelvan v. the Commissioner 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

A.M.Manikandan Vs the Intelligence Officer

Raja Vs the Inspector of Police

Leelavathi Vs State Rep.

P.Samu Vs the Superintendent of Police

J.Pondurai Vs R.Thangavelu

R.Murugan Vs N.Vasantha