Dismissed

Benazir v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC30 Oct 2019CRL OP(MD)/15625/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Criminal Original Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court issued guidelines to regulate police investigation procedures, specifically addressing alleged harassment of the petitioner during an inquiry triggered by a private complaint.

What did the court decide?

Directing police to follow specific guidelines regarding summoning witnesses, recording minutes, and adhering to Lalita Kumari norms to prevent harassment.

Benazir Vs The Inspector of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15625 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 30.10.2019

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15625 of 2019

Benazir

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Inspector of Police, Central Police Station, Thoothukudi.

¶11

2.Azarudeen ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to direct the first respondent not to harass the petitioner in the guise of enquiry based on the complaint given by her husband, namely, Azarudeen, S/o.Nijamudeen, i.e., the second respondent herein.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.A.S.Vaigunth For R1 : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to direct the first respondent not to harass the petitioner in the guise of enquiry based on the complaint given by her husband, namely, Azarudeen, S/o.Nijamudeen, i.e., the second respondent herein.

¶16

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondent police harassed the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

¶17

3.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submits that based on the complaint given by the complainant, the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.388 of 2019 and it is pending for investigation.

¶18

4.Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) for the respondent police.

¶19

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

¶20

1/3

¶21

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15625 of 2019

¶22

5.It is the grievance of the petitioner that the respondent police has been harassing her under the guise of an enquiry/investigation and hence, has invoked the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶23

6.An enquiry into a non cognizable offence or a cognizable offence is the unfettered powers of the Investigation Officers so long as the power to investigate/enquire into these offences are legitimately exercised within the frame work of Chapter XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Though the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the Magistrate to be a guardian in all the stages of the police investigation, there is no power envisaging him to interfere with the actual investigation or the mode of investigation. It is in this background that numerous petitions complaining of harassment are being reported and filed before this Court seeking for directions to refrain the police officials from harassing the persons named in a complaint.

¶24

7.This Court, exercising its power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code normally would not interfere with the investigation conducted by a police officer. Nevertheless, it would also not turn a blind eye to instances of harassment by the police under the guise of investigation is brought to its notice.

¶25

8.In the present case in hand, the petitioners have complained of harassment by the police based on a complaint and seek for this Court's intervention by way of a direction. The term 'harassment' by itself has a very wide meaning and hence, what could be harassment to the petitioner may not be the same to the police officer.

¶26

9.In order to circumvent such situations, the following guidelines are issued:

¶27

a)While summoning any person named in the complaint or any witness to the incident complained of, the police officer shall summon such person through a written summon under Section 160 Cr.P.C., specifying a particular date and time for appearing before them for such an enquiry/investigation.

¶28

b) The respondent police is directed to serve summons mentioning the CSR number, date of complaint and the name of the complainant.

¶29

c)The minutes of the enquiry shall be recorded in the general diary/station diary/daily diary of the police station.

¶30

d)The police officer shall refrain himself or herself from harassing persons called upon for enquiry/investigation.

¶31

e)The guidelines stipulated for preliminary enquiry or registration of FIR by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others [2014 (2) SCC (1)] shall be strictly adhered to.

¶32

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

¶33

2/3

¶34

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15625 of 2019

¶35

10.With the above observations and direction, the Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.

¶36

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-II) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) das To 1.The Inspector of Police, Central Police Station, Thoothukudi. 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1 CC to M/s.G.THALAIMUTHARASU, Advocate SR-95258.

¶37

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15625 of 2019 30.10.2019

¶38

CS(19.11.2019) 3P 4C

¶39

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

¶40

3/3

Benazir v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Benazir 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Moideen Kutti Pallipath Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

Soundararajan Vs State Represented by

Mohan Vs the State Represented by

Chandru @ Ramachandran Vs Inspector of Police

M.Suganya Vs M.Muniasamy

G.Udaya Kumar Vs State Rep. by Its