R.ABDULALIM v. THE STATE REP BY The Superintendent of Police
CRL OP/16491/2025 · 2025-06-09
P Velmurugan
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 61771 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 61771 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Crl.O.P.No.16491 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 09.06.2025
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Crl.O.P.No.16491 of 2025 ---
1. R.Abdulalim
2. Rajapathy .. Petitioners Vs.
1. The State rep. by The Superintendent of Police, Kancheepuram District.
2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Kancheepuram District.
3. D.Sampath .. Respondents Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to direct the second respondent herein not to harass the petitioners in the guise of enquiry on the basis of the representation, dated 31.05.2025 made to the first respondent herein. For petitioners : M/s.G.Magesh Kumar For respondents: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) for RR-1 and 2 Page No.
1 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.16491 of 2025
ORDER The petitioners have filed this petition to direct the second respondent herein not to harass the petitioners in the guise of enquiry on the basis of the representation, dated 31.05.2025 made to the first respondent herein.
2. Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, learned Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2. He submitted that there is no adverse order as against the third respondent.
3. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
4. On receipt of the complaint from the third respondent, summons were issued to the petitioners, but despite receipt of summons, the petitioners have not appeared before the respondents 1 and 2/Police and they are not co- operating for the enquiry/investigation as the case may be. In order to avoid enquiry/investigation, they have approached this Court with false allegations. Admittedly, the complaint was given by the third respondent against the petitioners. The respondents 1 and 2 have also issued summons for appearance of the petitioners on 12.04.2025. According to the respondents 1 and 2, the petitioners have not appeared before the investigating officer for investigation. It shows that the petitioners have not co-operated for investigation. Therefore, the present petition is dismissed. However, the petitioners are directed to co-operate Page No.
2 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.16491 of 2025 for the enquiry/investigation before the respondents 1 and 2/Police. 09.06.2025 cs To
1. The Superintendent of Police, Kancheepuram District.
2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Kancheepuram District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Page No.
3 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.16491 of 2025 P.VELMURUGAN, J cs Crl.O.PNo.16491 of 2025 09.06.2025 Page No.
4 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis