Dismissed

B.Ananthamuruga v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC3 Jun 2021CRL OP(MD)/7118/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This was a criminal original petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking directions not to harass petitioners alleged to be victims of false complaints. The petition was closed as the Court held that once an investigation was initiated and an FIR registered, issuing such directions would interfere with police proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition is closed with no direction issued to the respondents.

B.Ananthamuruga Vs The Superintendent of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.7118 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.06.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.7118 of 2021

1.B.Ananthamuruga

2.G.Balasubramanian

3.G.B.Manoranjitham

... Petitioners

Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, District Police Officer, Tiruchirappalli.

¶12

2.The Inspector of Police,

¶13

All Women Police Station (B1), Thiruverumbur, Tiruchirapalli.

3.Nagavalli Ganesh

4.Jeyanthi

5.K.M.Karthik

6.G.Stalin

7.Velraj ... Respondents

¶19

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioners in the guise of false complaint on the influences of respondents 3 to 6.

¶20

For Petitioners : Ms.T.Banumathy For R-1 and R-2 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate(Crl.side)

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This petition has been filed to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioners under the guise of an enquiry.

¶23

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) for the respondents 1 and 2.

¶24

3.Perused the materials placed on record.

¶25

4.When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submits that on receipt of the complaint, the respondent police conducted the investigation and registered a case in Crime No.8 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 294(b), 354

¶26

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

¶27

1/2

¶28

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.7118 of 2021

¶29

and 506(ii) of IPC against the petitioners.

¶30

5.Under such circumstances, once the regular FIR has been registered, the question of “Not to harass” will not arise. Any direction issued by this Court at this stage will amount to interfering with the investigation conducted by the respondent police.

¶31

6.Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is closed. Sd/-

¶32

Assistant Registrar(P & A)

¶33

// True Copy //

¶34

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶35

sji

¶36

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the Advocate/litigant concerned.

¶37

¶38

1.The Superintendent of Police, District Police Officer, Tiruchirappalli.

¶39

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station (B1), Thiruverumbur, Tiruchirapalli.

¶40

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

¶41

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.7118 of 2021 03.06.2021

¶42

na(CO) TR(17.06.2021) 2P 4C

¶43

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

¶44

2/2

B.Ananthamuruga v. The Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Ananthamuruga 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Rajendran Vs R.M.K.R.Durairaj (Died)

Chinnu Vs The Superintendent of Police

Murugan.K Vs the City Commissioner of Police

N.Ramachandran Vs The Superintendent of Police

Periyasamy.C Vs the Superintendent of Police

Veerasekar Vs The Superintendent of Police