1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:23.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD)No.17032 of 2011 T.Sunitha ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil. 2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kottar Police Station, Kottar, Kanyakumari District. 3.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Suchindrum Police Station, Suchindrum, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to direct the second and third respondents herein not to harass the petitioner and her family members. For Petitioner :: Mr.C.Rajakumar For Respondents :: Mr.P.Kannithevan Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the second and third respondents herein not to harass the petitioner and her family members. 2. Heard Mr.C.Rajakumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.Kannithevan, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the State. 3. According to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner and her family members are harassed by the respondent police under the guise of enquiry and therefore, the respondents may be directed to follow the norms to be followed for doing interrogation and suitable orders may be passed for not harassing the petitioners. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit in his argument that there is no harassment against the petitioner and her family members and and if any interrogation is needed by the respondent against the petitioner, the norms which are mentioned in the Judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in D.K.Basu Vs. State of West Bengal reported in AIR (1997) SC 610, would be followed in case of interrogation or any further investigation. He would further submit that there will not be any harassment and the enquiry or interrogation would be done in accordance with law. 5. Considering the submissions made on both sides, the police is entitled to investigate the matter by interrogating the petitioners in proper manner. According to the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate, there was no harassment done by the police. He would also state that there will not be any harassment in future also. 6. Recording the statement of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that the respondent police will not harass the petitioners in future under the guise of any enquiry in respect of the said case, this petition is closed with a direction to the effect that there shall be no harassment to the petitioner and her family members on the side of the respondent police and they are to follow the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in D.K.Basu Vs. State of West Bengal reported in AIR (1997) SC 610. 7. With the above direction, this Petition is disposed of. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (A.E) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil. 2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kottar Police Station, Kottar, Kanyakumari District. 3.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Suchindrum Police Station, Suchindrum, Kanyakumari District. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1 CC to Mr.C.Rajakumar, Advocate (SR.No.45914) Crl.O.P.(MD)No.17032 of 2011 23.12.2011 vs NSV/9.1.12/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/