1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1994 of 2011 Hema ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Trichy, Trichy District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Kallakudi Police Station, Trichy District. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondent police not to harass and not to interfere in the personal liberty of the petitioner and her family members. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Joel Paul Antony For Respondents : Mr.L.Murugan Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER This petition has been filed to direct the respondent police not to harass and not to interfere in the personal liberty of the petitioner and her family members. 2. Heard Mr.Joel Paul Antony, learned counsel for the petitioner 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 and her family members were 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 and her family members. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit in his argument that there is no complaint against the petitioner, but a complaint has been given by the petitioner, for which, the police has to enquire the petitioner for ascertain facts and there is no harassment against the petitioner and her family members and if any interrogation is needed by the respondents against the petitioner and her family members, 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 if any enquiry or interrogation, it would be done in accordance with law. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 5. According to the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate, there was no harassment by the respondents against the petitioner. He would also state that there would not be any harassment in future also. 6. Recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that the respondent police will not harass the petitioner and her family members 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/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Trichy, Trichy District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Kallakudi Police Station, Trichy District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, Madurai. +1cc to Mr.Joel Paul Antony, Advocate SR.9775 vsm SR : 09.03.2011 : 2p/5c Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1994 of 2011 23.02.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/