JUDGMENT

The petitioner, a paddy farmer, is before this Court complaining that the 1st respondent has been harassing him on the basis of a frivolous complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent. According to the petitioner, the respondents 2 and 3 visited the petitioner and offered to provide him aid for paddy cultivation. He was told that he would have to spend a sum of Rs.75,000/- to execute the works by including it in the “Mahatma Gandhi Employment Guarantee Program”. It is contended that the petitioner paid a sum of Rs.25000/- to the 2nd respondent by way of advance. According to the petitioner, the work carried out by the 2nd respondent and his workers was totally unsatisfactory and hence he refused to pay the amount which was originally agreed upon. The respondents 2 and 3 lodged a complaint before the 1st respondent, who has been constantly summoning the petitioner to the police station and has been harassing him. He contends that the dispute is purely civil in nature and there is no justification on the part of the 1st respondent in interfering with the same.

2. Sri Bimal.K. Nath, the learned Senior Government Pleader on instructions submitted that after having entered into an und