T.C. Amarnathan v. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by

Madras HC1 Apr 2026CRL OP/8113/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras HC single-judge order (A.D. Jagadish Chandira, 01.04.2026), Crl.O.P.No.8113 of 2026: anti-harassment petition under Section 528 BNSS against B-7 Vellavedu Police Station, Thiruvallur District; harassment alleged under pretext of enquiry linked to civil dispute with petitioner's elder brother; enquiry C.No.634/COP Avadi Grievance/2026 reported completed, petitioner not harassed, complaint closed; petition closed/disposed with no direction granted. No statutes besides S.528 BNSS; no cases cited; no dissent.

What did the court decide?

None - petition closed after recording the State's submission; no direction issued. ¶22-23

T.C. Amarnathan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.8113 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 01.04.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.8113 of 2026

¶7

T.C.Amarnathan ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The State of Tamil Nadu represented by, The Inspector of Police, B-7 Vellavedu Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

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.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Lokeshwaran

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Additional Public Prosecutor

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

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

¶16

1/3

¶17

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

¶18

Crl.O.P.No.8113 of 2026

¶19

2 . The case of the petitioner is that under the pretext of

¶20

conducting an enquiry i n connection with the existing civil dispute with his elder brother, the respondent police are unnecessarily harassing him .

¶21

3 . Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that based on the complaint given against the petitioner, an enquiry was conducted by the respondent in C.No.634/COP Avadi Grievance/2026. He further submitted that the petitioner was called only for the purpose of enquiry and was not harassed during the enquiry. However, the complaint has now been closed.

¶22