Disposed¶25

H.Ram Prakash Reddy v. State Rep. by

Madras HC9 Mar 2026CRL OP/6028/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, single-judge order (Justice M.Nirmal Kumar), 09.03.2026, Crl.O.P.No.6028 of 2026 under S.528 BNSS — anti-harassment petition by H.Ram Prakash Reddy and H.Sri Vidya disposed of; police visits to the petitioner (residing at Bellary) were for execution of a Non-Bailable Warrant against his brother Ravi Prakash Reddy in an S.138 NI Act case (S.T.C.No.11 of 2020, District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Kalasapakkam); held not to constitute harassment; petitioner to disclose brother's whereabouts via counsel; trial court free to act against petitioner for any false representation.

What did the court decide?

No restraining direction was issued against the respondent; the petition was disposed of with the observation that execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant cannot be termed as harassment. ¶25

H.Ram Prakash Reddy Vs State Rep. by — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No restraining direction was issued against the respondent; the petition was disposed of with the observation that execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant cannot be termed as harassment.

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent police's repeated visits to the petitioner's residence in connection with the execution of a Non-Bailable Warrant against his brother amount to harassment, warranting a direction that the respondent not harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

¶19

Court's answer

The respondent police visited the petitioner's residence pursuant to the Judicial Magistrate's direction to execute a Non-Bailable Warrant against the petitioner's brother Ravi Prakash Reddy, and the tower location indicates that the brother is residing at the petitioner's place; therefore, the execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant cannot be termed as harassment.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner may make necessary arrangements through his counsel to inform the whereabouts of Ravi Prakash Reddy.

¶24

Key takeaways

If it is found that the petitioner has made any false representation with a view to stall the execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant, the trial Court is at liberty to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras (M.Nirmal Kumar, J.), order dated 09.03.2026 disposing of Crl.O.P.No.6028 of 2026, filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita by H.Ram Prakash Reddy and H.Sri Vidya seeking a direction that the respondent (Sub Inspector of Police, Kadaladi Police Station, Tiruvannamalai) not harass them under the guise of enquiry. The petitioner, residing at Bellary, complained of repeated police visits connected with the execution of a Non-Bailable Warrant against his brother Ravi Prakash Reddy, against whom a case under Section 138 of NI Act is pending before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Kalasapakkam in S.T.C.No.11 of 2020. The Court held that the visits were made pursuant to the Judicial Magistrate's direction and that the tower location indicates the brother resides at the petitioner's place, so the execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant cannot be termed as harassment. The petitioner was permitted to inform the brother's whereabouts through his counsel, and the trial Court was left at liberty to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law if any false representation to stall the warrant's execution is found.

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.6028 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09.03.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.6028 of 2026

¶7

1.H.Ram Prakash Reddy 2.H.Sri Vidya

¶8

... Petitioners

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The State represented by The Sub Inspector of Police, Kadaladi Police Station, Polur Sub Division, Kadaladi, Parvathiamalai R.F., Tiruvannamalai 606 908.

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to direct the respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

¶13

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Sathish For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Jospeh Selvam Additional Public Prosecutor

¶14

1/4

¶15

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

¶16

Crl.O.P.No.6028 of 2026

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent not to harass the petitioner under the guise of enquiry.

¶19

The case of the petitioner is that he has no connection with the case pending against his brother Ravi Prakash Reddy and that the respondent police are unnecessarily harassing him by repeatedly visting his residence in connection with the execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant.

¶20

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the respondent police had visited the residence of the petitioner only for enquiry and not for harassing.

¶21

4 . Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the materials it is seen that the petitioner is residing at Bellary and that his brother, Ravi Prakash Reddy is residing at Hyderabad. It is submitted that a case under Section 138 of NI Act is pending against the said Ravi Prakash Reddy before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Kalasapakkam in S.T.C.No.11 of 2020. It is seen that the respondent police, pursuant to the direction of the Judicial Magistrate, have taken steps to 2/4

¶22

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

¶23

Crl.O.P.No.6028 of 2026

¶24

execute a Non-Bailable Warrant against the said Ravi Prakash Reddy. In that connection, the respondent police had visited the petitioner’s residence and made enquiries regarding the whereabouts of the said Ravi Prakash Reddy and the tower location also indicates that he is residing at the petitioner’s place. Therefore, the execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant cannot be termed as harassment. However, the petitioner may make necessary arrangements through his counsel to inform the whereabouts of the said Ravi Prakash Reddy. If it is found that the petitioner has made any false representation with a view to stall the execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant, the trial Court is at liberty to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶25

5 . Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.

¶26

09.03.2026

¶27

Neutral Citation: Yes/No vkr

¶28

3/4

¶29

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

¶30

Crl.O.P.No.6028 of 2026