1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.11.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL.O.P.(MD).No.15111 of 2011 1.K.Karthikai perumal 2.K.Senthilvel : Petitioners Vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District, 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. 3.The Inspector of Police, Sakkottai Police Station, Sivagangai District. 4.VVKR Murugaiah 5.P.Panner Selvam 6.Chidambaram : Respondents (Respondents 4 to 6 are given up as per the endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioners on 22.11.2011) PRAYER: Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct 1 to 3 respondents and their men not to harass the petitioners, their employees, family members and their men, based on the complaints of the respondents 4 to 6 and their men. For Petitioners : Mr.R.M.Makesh Kumaravel For Respondents : Mrs.S.Prabha, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for RR1 to R3 O R D E R *********** This petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 3 and their men not to harass the petitioners, their employees, family members and their men, based on the complaints of the respondents 4 to 6 and their men. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 2.Heard Mr.R.M.Makesh Kumaravel, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mrs.S.Prabha, learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3/State. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the respondents 4 to 6 may be given up. To that effect he has also made an endorsement. Accordingly, the respondents 4 to 6 are given up. 4. According to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners were harassed by the respondents 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. 5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit in her argument that there is no harassment against the petitioners and if any interrogation is needed by the respondent 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. She would further submit that there will not be any harassment and the enquiry or interrogation would be done in accordance with law. 6. 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. She would also state that there will not be any harassment in future also. 7. 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 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. 8. With the above direction, this Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(C.O) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District, 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. 3.The Inspector of Police, Sakkottai Police Station, Sivagangai District. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +One cc to Mr.R.M.Mahesh Kumaravel, Advocate, SR.No.41006 vsm rl/6 c- 30.11.2011 ORDER MADE IN CRL.O.P.(MD).No.15111 of 2011 22.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/