1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.11.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Criminal Original Petition(MD)No.15322 of 2011 M.Senthilvelan ... Petitioner Vs. State rep. By 1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai, Madurai District. 2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai District. ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to direct the 2nd respondent herein not to harass the petitioner and his family members under the guise of enquiry. For Petitioner :: Mr.R.Jeyaprakash For Respondents :: Mr.P.Kannithevan Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent herein not to harass the petitioner and his family members under the guise of enquiry. 2. Heard Mr.R.Jeyaprakash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.P.Kannithevan, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the State. 3. According to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the 2nd respondent is interfering with the civil dispute of the petitioner and the petitioner was harassed by the 2nd respondent under the guise of enquiry and therefore, the 2nd 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. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit in his argument that the 2nd respondent 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 2nd respondent 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 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 2nd respondent 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 2nd respondent 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 2nd 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(C.S) To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai, Madurai District. 2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai District. 3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. vsm Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15322 of 2011 24.11.2011 TR :30.11.2011: 2p/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/