Allowed

P.Hariram v. Additional Director General of Police

Madras HC30 Mar 2021WP/8149/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioners sought a direction to prevent third respondent police from harassing them. The High Court held that the dispute was monetary in nature and for the Civil Court to decide, directing the police not to interfere.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent police not to interfere with the money dispute; parties to agitate rights in a competent civil court.

P.Hariram Vs Additional Director… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 30.03.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶5

WP No.8149 of 2021

¶6

P.Hariram
2. R.Pradeep
3. K.Santhosh ... Petitioners
vs.
1 Additional Director General of Police, (Eow),
SIDCO, Old Corporate Building,
Thiru. Vi. Ka Industrial Estate
Guindy, Chennai- 32.
2 The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Economic Offences Wing- II,
Guindy, Chennai- 32.
3 The Inspector of Police
Econmic officens Wing- II,
No C- 48 Block-II,
Sidco Old Corporate building,
Guindy, Chennai-32.
4. Sudha ... Respondents

¶7

Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent, not to harass the petitioners as they have been forced to undergo the ordeal under the pretext of enquiry by the third respondent Police.

¶8

For Petitioners : Mr.P.G.Thiygau

¶9

For Respondents : Mr.C.Raghavan

¶10

Government Advocate, (Crl. Side) for 1 to 3

¶11

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

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondent Police not to harass the petitioners.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3.

¶15

Taking into consideration the fact that the nature of the dispute involved in this case is a money dispute, it is for the parties to redress the same before the appropriate Civil Court and the respondent police will have no role to play in a case of this nature.

¶16

This Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to
the respondent police not to interfere with the money dispute
and it is open for the parties to agitate their rights before
the competent civil court. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
jv
To
1 Additional Director General of Police, (Eow),
SIDCO, Old Corporate Building,
Thiru. Vi. Ka Industrial Estate
Guindy, Chennai- 32.
2 The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Economic Offences Wing- II,
Guindy, Chennai- 32.
3 The Inspector of Police
Econmic officens Wing- II,
No C- 48 Block-II,
Sidco Old Corporate building,
Guindy, Chennai-32.

¶17

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

¶18

4 The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶19

+1cc to Mr.P.G.Thiygau, Advocate SR.No.20456

¶20

WP No.8149 of 2021

¶21

GPL(CO) GMY(19/04/2021)

¶22

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

P.Hariram v. Additional Director General of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Hariram v. Additional Director General 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

Madhu Vasudevan Vs State Rep by

S.Irfan Vs Barkath

Subburaj Vs the State Represented by

Nakkheeran Gopal Vs C.Ve.Shanmugam

T.Karthik Vs State by

K.Palani Velu Vs The Commissioner of Police