Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J
S.Ramadass – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu represented by, 1. The Superintendent of Police, Coimbatore District. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners claim harassment in a civil dispute. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. government advocate states police are conducting necessary enquirer. (Para 3) |
| 3. court clarifies inquiry procedures and protections for petitioners. (Para 4) |
| 4. outcome of the petition is a directive to the police. (Para 5) |
O R D E R
The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent police not to harass the petitioners under the guise of enquiry.
2. The case of the petitioners is that under the pretext of conducting an enquiry in connection with a civil dispute between the petitioners and one Banurekha, the respondent Police are unnecessarily harassing the petitioners.
3. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), on instructions, submitted that based on the complaint given by Banurekha, the respondent Police are conducting an enquiry in C.No.388 of 2025 and that the petitioners were called only for enquiry. He further submitted that the petitioners were not harassed by the respondents.
4. Such being the position, it is for the Investigating Agency to issue appropriate notice to the petitioners under Section 35 (3) of BNSS for enquiry and on receipt of such noti
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
