1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2423 of 2011 1. Lakshmikanthan 2. L.Sumathi 3. L.Narendran ... Petitioners Vs. 1. The State represented by The Deputy Inspector General of Police Dindigul Region, Dindigul 2. The Superintendent of Police Dindigul District, Dindigul. 3. The Inspector of Police Town North Police Station Dindigul, Dindigul District. 4. Mr.Suresh ... Respondents PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the 3rd and 4th respondents not to harass the petitioners by interfering into the tenancy right of the petitioners existed with one Somasundaram and his wife Yasodha in respect of the property situated at No.245, Sonaimuthu Konar Santhu, Y.M.R.Patti, Dindigul Town. For Petitioners : Mr.R.Anand For RR 1 to 3 : Mr.L.Murugan Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the 3rd and 4th respondents not to harass the petitioners by interfering into the tenancy right of the petitioners existed with one Somasundaram and his wife Yasodha in respect of the property situated at No.245, Sonaimuthu Konar Santhu, Y.M.R.Patti, Dindigul Town. 2. Heard Mr.R.Anand, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and also Mr.L.Murugan, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. 3. The main grievance of the petitioners is that without any valid reason, the respondent police are harassing the petitioners. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. According to the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), there is no complaint received against the petitioners nor any enquiry needed against the petitioners and therefore, there is no harassment. 5. Considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), even if any complaint has been filed, the petitioners shall not be harassed and enquiry shall be conducted by following procedure contemplated under D.K.Basu Vs. State of West Bengal reported in AIR (1997) SC 610 and the respondent shall not interfere in civil dispute relating to the property of any one of the rival parties and relating to properties concerned, the civil Court is the competent forum and if any cognizable offence is found made out, then, the interference of the police is warranted. The parties should approach only the Civil Court regarding civil dispute. 6. The Criminal Original Petition is disposed of, recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side). Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Deputy Inspector General of Police Dindigul Region, Dindigul. 2. The Superintendent of Police Dindigul District, Dindigul. 3. The Inspector of Police Town North Police Station Dindigul, Dindigul District. 4. The Sub Inspector of Police Town North Police Station Dindigul, Dindigul District. 5. The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, Madurai. Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2423 of 2011 25.02.2011 vsg NSV/9.3.11/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/