IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 09.09.2022 CORAM THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA W.P.No.21320 of 2021 and WMP.No.22557 of 2021

1.Sathiyamoorthy

2.Sarvanan ... Petitioners Vs.

1.The Registrar, Tamil Nadu State Human Rights Commission, Chennai.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Arakkonam Sub-Division, Ranipet District.

3.Periyasamy ... Respondents Prayer:- This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue writ of Certiorari calling for the entire records in pursuant to the police summons dated 03.08.2021, issued by the second respondent to the petitioners on a complaint given by the third respondent to the first respondent and to quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.P.Prabakaran For R1 & R2 : Mr.A.Damodaran Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This writ petition has been preferred to issue a writ of Certiorari to call for the entire records pertaining to the police summons dated 03.08.2021, issued by the second respondent to the petitioners, on the complaint given by the third respondent to the first respondent and to quash the same as illegal.

2.The impugned order dated 03.08.2021 is a summon issued by the second respondent directing the petitioner to be present for enquiry on 09.08.2021 at about 11.00 am. It is seen from the impugned order that the said summon has been issued in view of the complaint given by the third respondent before the said Human Rights Commission.

3.Before going into the merits of the complaint and the further action, it has to be seen whether the summon has been issued by observing the correct legal formalities. It is seen in the summon dated 03.08.2021 that it was issued in reference to Section 160 read with Section 91 of Cr.P.C. Obviously the contents of the impugned order show that the petitioner was asked to make his appearance for preliminary enquiry on the complaint. Only after FIR is registered, the summons can be issued under Section 160 r/w 91 of Cr.P.C Since no criminal offence said to have been committed by the petitioner, the second respondent ought not to have issued a summon under Section 160 read with Section 91 of Cr.P.C. It is further stated that the issue, which has been raised by the third respondent in his complaint, is the subject matter of the civil suit between the parties. Since, the summon has been issued illegally by invoking inappropriate provisions of law, it is liable to be set aside.

4.Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed and the police summon dated 03.08.2021, issued by the second respondent to the petitioners are quashed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

09.09.2022 Speaking/Non-speaking Index : Yes/No Dua R.N.MANJULA, J.

Dua To

1.The Registrar, Tamil Nadu State Human Rights Commission, Chennai.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Arakkonam Sub-Division, Ranipet District.

W.P.No.21320 of 2021 and WMP.No.22557 of 2021

09.09.2022