A.M.Shanmugam vs The Superintendent Of Police on 3 October, 2019

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

A.M.Shanmugam vs The Superintendent Of Police on 3 October, 2019

Bench: M.S.Ramesh

                                                                                 Crl.O.P.No.26675 of 2019

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED: 03.10.2019

                                                          CORAM:

                                     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

                                               Crl.O.P.No.26675 of 2019

                      1.A.M.Shanmugam
                      2.R.Shanmugasundaram                                   ..      Petitioners

                                                            Vs.

                      1.The Superintendent of Police,
                        Namakkal.

                      2.The Inspector of Police,
                        Pallipalayam Police Station,
                        Pallipalayam,
                        Namakkal District.                                  ..       Respondents


                      PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to
                      direct the respondents not to harass the petitioners in order to prevent
                      them from operating agriculture activities in the land situated in S.Nos.24,
                      25 and 124 of Kaliyanur Village, Komarapalayam Taluk, Namakkal District
                      belongs to Arulmigu Kalyana Venkataramana Perumal Koil.


                                   For Petitioners          :      Mr.S.Doraiswamy

                                   For Respondents         :       Mrs.V.Saratha Devi
                                                                   Government Advocate (Crl.Side)



                      1/6


http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                              Crl.O.P.No.26675 of 2019



                                                           ORDER

It is the grievance of the petitioners that the respondent police have been harassing them from operating agriculture activities under the guise of an enquiry/investigation and hence, has invoked the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

2.An enquiry into a non-cognizable offence or a cognizable offence is the unfettered powers of the Investigation Officers, so long as the power to investigate/enquire into these offences are legitimately exercised within the frame work of Chapter XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Though the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the Magistrate to be a guardian in all the stages of the police investigation, there is no power envisaging him to interfere with the actual investigation or the mode of investigation.

It is in this background that numerous petitions complaining of harassment are being reported and filed before this Court seeking for directions to refrain the police officials from harassing the persons named in a complaint.

3.This Court, exercising its power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code normally would not interfere with the investigation 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.O.P.No.26675 of 2019 conducted by a police officer. Nevertheless, it would also not turn a blind eye to instances of harassment by the police under the guise of investigation is brought to its notice.

4.It is seen that in some cases, the investigation pending before the Police has been stayed by Court orders. It is needless to point out that in cases of this nature, the respondent Police will not be entitled to even proceed with the investigation and therefore, the petitioners may not have an apprehension of harassment in the hands of the Police.

5.In the present case in hand, the petitioner has complained of harassment by the police based on a complaint and seeks for this Court's intervention by way of a direction. The term 'harassment' by itself has a very wide meaning and hence, what could be harassment to the petitioners may not be the same to the police officer.

6.In order to circumvent such situations, the following guidelines are issued:

3/6

http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.O.P.No.26675 of 2019

a)While summoning any persons named in the complaint or any witness to the incident complained of, the police officer shall summon such persons through a written summon under Section 160 Cr.P.C., specifying a particular date and time for appearing before them for such an enquiry/investigation.

b)The minutes of the enquiry shall be recorded in the general diary/station diary/daily diary of the police station.

c)The police officer shall refrain himself or herself from harassing persons called upon for enquiry/investigation.

d)The guidelines stipulated for preliminary enquiry or registration of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others [2014 (2) SCC (1)] shall be strictly adhered to.

7.With the above observations and direction, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed.

03.10.2019 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No jas/hvk 4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.O.P.No.26675 of 2019 To

1.The Superintendent of Police, Namakkal.

2.The Inspector of Police, Pallipalayam Police Station, Pallipalayam, Namakkal District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

5/6

http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.O.P.No.26675 of 2019 M.S.RAMESH.J, jas/hvk Crl.O.P.No.26675 of 2019 03.10.2019 6/6 http://www.judis.nic.in

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court