Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 34550
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J
Parthiban – Appellant
Versus
The State rep., by The Inspector of Police, E-1 Mylapore Police Station, Mylapore, Chennai – Respondent
Criminal Original Petition
For Petitioner: Mr. D. Arun
For Respondent: Mr. Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, Additional Public Prosecutor
Police enquiry during elections not harassment; petition disposed on undertaking to appear.
Headnote:Under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, petitioner sought direction to prevent harassment by police during investigation following a representation. Petitioner claimed no habitual offending and employment as manager, facing undue police pressure. Court noted petitioner as history-sheeter with prior cases but viewed election-time enquiry as legitimate, not harassment. Petitioner undertook to appear before police on specified date. Respondent highlighted petitioner's criminal history. Court assessed materials and submissions to determine no undue harassment occurred. Petition disposed of upon recording undertaking.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition to prevent investigation harassment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. history-sheeter; election enquiry legitimate. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. undertaking to appear; petition disposed. (Para 5 , 6) |
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the respondent not to harass the petitioner during the course of the investigation, except in due process of law, based on the representation dated 12.01.2026.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not a habitual offender. It is further submitted that the petitioner is working as a Manager in a private firm at Alandur, Chennai and is leading his day-to-day life under continuous harassment by the respondent. Hence, the present petition has been filed.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner is a history-sheeter in H.S.No.2 of 2021 and has four previous cases.
4. Considering the submissions and on perusal of the materials, this Court is of the view that the petitioner was called for enquiry during the general election, and the same cannot be termed as harassment.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions submitted that the petitioner undertakes to appear before the respondent on 27.04.2026 without fail.
6. Recording the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.
