1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD)No.16039 of 2011 M.Pandi Durai @ Durai Pandi ... Petitioner -Vs-. 1.State rep. by The Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai. 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Madurai Region, Madurai. 3.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai. 4.The Inspector of Police, Thirunagar Police Station, Madurai District. 5.V.Guru Venkat Raj, Inspector of Police, Thirunagar Police Station, Madurai District. ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to direct the fifth respondent not to interfere into the petitioner's peaceful business viz running a canteen in the name and style of D.R.J. Canteen, Thirunagar third stop, Madurai District by way of harassing the petitioner. For Petitioner :Mr.R.Anand For Respondents :Mr.P.Kannaithevan, Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) O R D E R This petition has been filed to direct the fifth respondent not to interfere into the petitioner's peaceful business viz running a canteen in the name and style of D.R.J. Canteen, Thirunagar third stop, Madurai District by way of harassing the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr.R.Anand, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.P.Kannithevan, 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 fifth respondent police under the guise of enquiry and therefore, the fifth respondent 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 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. 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 petitioner 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 will 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 petitioner 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. 7. With the above direction, this Petition is closed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Writs) /True copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai. 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Madurai Region, Madurai. 3.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai. 4.The Inspector of Police, Thirunagar Police Station, Madurai District. 5.V.Guru Venkat Raj, Inspector of Police, Thirunagar Police Station, Madurai District. gsr Crl.O.P.(MD)No.16039 of 2011 13.12.2011 TR : 19.12.2011: 2p/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/