Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

S Antony [ vs The Inspector Of Police

Madras High Court|12 January, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

This petition has been filed for a direction to the respondent not to harass the petitioner without any due process of law.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in respect of an earlier complaint given by the de facto complainant, with regard to a civil dispute between the petitioner and the de facto complainant, the respondent police is harassing the petitioner by asking the petitioner to appear before the respondent regularly without any valid reason, for giving explanation. He further submits that the petitioner had already appeared before the respondent police and explained his case. He also submitted that no notice has been received from the police authorities so as to make the petitioner's presence, as per law.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that appropriate notice would be issued to the petitioner to appear before the respondent police and on receipt of the same, the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police and cooperate with the investigation.
4. Recording the above statement made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this Criminal Original Petition is closed. It is made clear that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police as and when notice is received, and also cooperate with the investigation.
Index : Yes/No 12.01.2017 Internet : Yes/No KM To
1. The Inspector of Police, T-4, Mangadu Police Station, Mangadu, Chennai.
2. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai-600 104.
R.MAHADEVAN, J.
KM Crl.O.P.No.159 of 2017 12.01.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

S Antony [ vs The Inspector Of Police

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
12 January, 2017
Judges
  • R Mahadevan