Disposed¶22

R.Manikandan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC29 Jan 2025CRL OP(MD)/1635/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anti-harassment petition under S.528 BNSS; direction sought to Karur Town Police not to harass petitioner in GST-dues enquiry; dispute over Rs.11,66,046/- GST dues of Tvl.Bright Tech Engineering Industries; proprietor Prabhakaran's complaint alleging petitioner was partner; notice dated 13.08.2024 u/s 61 TNGST Act 2017 to Prabhakaran; police closed case on 08.12.2024 as GST dues not investigable by police; petition disposed on recording Government Advocate's submission; Madurai Bench, single Judge M. Nirmal Kumar.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition was disposed of after the Court recorded that the case had been closed by the police on 08.12.2024 and that the petitioner is no more required for any enquiry. ¶22

R.Manikandan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The Criminal Original Petition was disposed of after the Court recorded that the case had been closed by the police on 08.12.2024 and that the petitioner is no more required for any enquiry.

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction should be issued to the respondent police (Inspector of Police, Karur Town Police Station) not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry in connection with the GST dues of Tvl.Bright Tech Engineering Industries, pursuant to the complaint by its Proprietor Prabhakaran.

¶11

Court's answer

Recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) that the police had already closed the case on 08.12.2024 as being GST dues of Tvl.Bright Tech Engineering Industries which cannot be investigated by the respondent police, and that the petitioner is therefore no more required for any enquiry, this Court disposed of the Criminal Original Petition.

¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Original Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court (Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1635 of 2025, decided 29.01.2025, M. Nirmal Kumar, J.). The petitioner, R.Manikandan, sought a direction to the respondent police (Superintendent of Police and Inspector of Police, Karur Town Police Station, Karur District) not to harass him under the guise of enquiry over GST dues of Rs.11,66,046/- of Tvl.Bright Tech Engineering Industries, whose Proprietor Prabhakaran had complained that the petitioner was a partner hosting the tax amount; the petitioner denied partnership and produced a notice dated 13.08.2024 issued under Section 61 of TNGST Act 2017 to Prabhakaran himself demanding the said sum. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) submitted that on Prabhakaran's complaint both were called for enquiry, that neither produced supporting documents, and that finding the matter to be GST dues which cannot be investigated by the police, the case was closed on 08.12.2024 and the petitioner was no more required for any enquiry. Recording that submission, the Court disposed of the petition.

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1635 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 29.01.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1635 of 2025

¶7

R.Manikandan : Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The State of Tamil nadu rep., by The Superintendent of Police, O/o., The Superintendent of Police, Karur District.

¶10

2.The Inspector of Police, Karur Town Police Station, Karur District. : Respondents

¶11

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to issue a direction to the respondent police herein not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

¶12

For Petitioner : Ms.R.Vidhya for M/s.SS.Madhavan Law Associates For Respondents : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi Government Advocate (crl.side)

¶13

1/5

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1635 of 2025

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The petitioner had sent a representation on 17.01.2025 stating the Inspector of Police, Karur Town Police Station, was demanding the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.11,66,046/- for GST dues of Tvl.Bright Tech Engineering Industries of Prabhakaran. The said Prabhakaran had lodged a complaint as if the petitioner is a partner and he hosts the tax amount and hence, the petitioner was called for enquiry and he was forced to give an undertaking that he would pay back GST dues. The petitioner had categorically stated that he is not a partner in Tvl.Bright Tech Engineering Industries of Prabhakaran. Despite the same, the police have been harassing the petitioner. In support of his contention, the petitioner had produced notice dated 13.08.2024 issued under Section 61 of TNGST Act 2017 to Prabhakaran, who is Proprietor of Tvl.Bright Tech Engineering Industries demanding Rs. 11,66,046/- from the said Prabhakaran. This being so, the said Prabhakaran shifting the blame on the petitioner is not proper.

¶18

2/5

¶19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1635 of 2025

¶21

2. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) submitted that on the complainant of Prabhakaran, the petitioner and Prabhakaran were called for enquiry, during enquiry, it was found that neither the Prabhakaran nor the petitioner were unable to produce the relevant documents in support of their contention. Thereafter, finding that it is a GST dues of Tvl.Bright Tech Engineering Industries, which can not be investigated by the respondent police, the police had closed the case on 08.12.2024. In view of the same, the petitioner is no more required for any enquiry.

¶22

3. Recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

¶23

29.01.2025

¶24

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Rmk

¶25

3/5

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1635 of 2025