1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.06.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6380 of 2011 Rajeswari alias Hethciyal ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District at Virudhunagar. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sivakasi Sub Division, Sivakasi. 3.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station,Sivakasi. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Dhana Chandra Prakash For Respondents : Ms.S.Prabha, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER This petition has been filed to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr.D.Dhana Chandra Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.S.Prabha, 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 respondents 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. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit in her argument that a complaint is pending against the petitioner and there is no harassment against the petitioner and if any interrogation is needed by the respondents 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. She would further submit that there will not be any harassment and if any enquiry or interrogation, it would be done in accordance with law. 5. According to the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), there was no harassment by the respondents against the petitioner. She would also state that there would not be any harassment in future also. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 6. Recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that the respondent police will not harass the petitioner in future under the guise of any enquiry, this petition is closed with a direction to the effect that there shall be no harassment to the petitioner 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 ordered. SD DEPUTY REGISTRAR ( ACCOUNTS )/ VACATION OFFICER /TRUE COPY/ ASST REGISTRAR vsm To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District at Virudhunagar. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sivakasi Sub Division, Sivakasi. 3.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Sivakasi. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, Madurai. DM:2011::JUNE:08:: Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6380 of 2011 02.06.2011 2P:5C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/