1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.02.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD).No.1616 of 2011 1.Lakshmiammal 2.Rengarajan 3.Vijayakumari 4.Parthasarathy 5.Raghavan ...Petitioners -Vs- 1.The Inspector General of Police (CBCID), Tamil Nadu Police Headquarters, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai. 3.State rep. By Inspector of Police, C.B.C.I.D., Pudukkottai. ...Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the 3rd respondent police not to harass the petitioners without due procedure of law. For Petitioners : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan For Respondents : Mr.L.Murugan Government Advocate (Crl. Side) O R D E R This petition has been filed to direct the 3rd respondent police not to harass the petitioners without due procedure of law. 2. Heard Mr.S.Deenadhayalan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.L.Murugan, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side)appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3. According to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was 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 petitioner. 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 petitioners and if any interrogation is needed by the respondents against the petitioners, 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 would 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 petitioners 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 closed. arul Sd/- Deputy Registrar[W] /True copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Inspector General of Police (CBCID), Tamil Nadu Police Headquarters, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai. 3.The Inspector of Police, C.B.C.I.D., Pudukkottai. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Crl.O.P.(MD).No.1616 of 2011 Dated:09.02.2011 2P/5C RPB 22.02.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/