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.15105 of 2011 P.Karthikayan : Petitioner Vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Superintendent Office, Virudhunagar District. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar. 3.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar. 4.Kamal 5.Soody Raja 6.C.Ravichandran : Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct the 1st respondent not to harass these petitioner as civil suits are pending before the competent Court with respect to the same transaction without due process of law. For Petitioner : Mr.K.P.S.Palanivel Rajan For Respondents : Mrs.S.Prabha, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for RR1 to R3 RR4 to 6 Givenup O R D E R This petition has been filed to direct the 1st respondent not to harass the petitioners as civil suits are pending before the competent Court with respect to the same transaction without due process of law. 2. Heard Mr.K.P.S.Palanivel Rajan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.S.Prabha, learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3/State. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner 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 petitioner, the respondents-police is interfering with the civil dispute of the petitioner and the petitioner was harassed by the respondents- police under the guise of enquiry and therefore, the respondents-police 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 5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit in her argument that the respondents-police is not interfering with the civil rights of the petitioner and there is no harassment against the petitioner and if any interrogation is needed by the respondents-police 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. 6. According to the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate, there was no harassment by the respondents-police against the petitioner. She would also state that there would not be any harassment in future also. 7. Recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that the respondents-police is not interfering the civil rights of the petitioner and they 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 respondents-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 ordered. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Superintendent Office, Virudhunagar District. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch,Virudhunagar. 3.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Vsm GH : 30.11.2011 : 2p/5c CRL.O.P.(MD).No.15105 of 2011 22.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/