Dismissed

C.Patturaj v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC15 Nov 2019CRL OP(MD)/2204/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single-judge bench of the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court disposed of a Criminal Original Petition filed by petitioner C. Patturaj invoking inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. alleging police harassment. The court issued guidelines for summoning witnesses and recording minutes to curb harassment.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of with guidelines issued to the respondents.

C.Patturaj Vs the Superintendent of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2204 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 15.11.2019

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

CRL.O.P (MD) No.2204 of 2019

C.Patturaj

... Petitioner

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

¶11

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

¶12

3.Purusothaman

¶13

(R3 impleaded as per order dated 28.02.2019 made in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.1531 of 2019

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to direct the 2^nd respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Pon Karthikeyan For Respondent : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, G.A.(Crl. Side) for RR1 and 2 Mr.S.Asaithambi for R3

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the 2^nd respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

¶19

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

¶20

The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the respondent police submits that on the complaint given by the defacto complainant against the petitioner, petition enquiry is pending. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶21

1/3

¶22

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2204 of 2019

¶23

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate (criminal side) for the respondent police.

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

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.

¶27

In the present case in hand, the petitioner has 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.

¶28

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

¶29

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 him for such an enquiry/investigation.

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

d)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.

¶33

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

¶34

2/3

¶35

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2204 of 2019

¶36

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

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

Assistant Registrar () // True Copy //

¶39

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶40

Arul To

¶41

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

¶42

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

¶43

copy to

¶44

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

¶45

+1 CC to Mr.S.ASAITHAMBI, Advocate ( SR-98589[F] dated 15/11/2019 ) +1 CC to Mr.R.PON KARTHIKEYAN, Advocate ( SR-99410[F] dated 19/11/2019 )

¶46

Order made in CRL.O.P (MD) No.2204 of 2019 15.11.2019

¶47

VB(03.12.2019) 3P 6C

¶48

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

¶49

3/3

C.Patturaj v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Patturaj 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

Rev.Father Lusiyan Thamas Fr, Vs the Inspector of Police

Anbumani, Vs the Superintendent of Police

A.Veluchamy Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

R.Dhineshmary Vs the Commissioner of Police

Kondu Reddy, Vs the Superintendent of Police

Sittammal, Vs the Superintendent of Police