Leelavathy Ammal v. Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai, Egmore, Chennai
2012-02-16
VINOD K.SHARMA
body2012
DigiLaw.ai
Judgment :- 1. Petitioner has approached this court with a prayer for issuance of writ in the nature of prohibition, to prohibit respondents 1 and 2 from interfering with the civil dispute of the petitioner with the 3rd respondent. 2. In support of the writ petition, the petitioner has placed on record two complaints, which were filed by the petitioner. The submission of the petitioner is that no action has been taken on the complaint filed by the petitioner, whereas on the complaint of 3rd respondent the petitioner has been called for investigation. 3. Petitioner has not placed on record any notice issued by the Police department calling him to come for investigation in support of the allegation. The petitioner has not impleaded any person by name who may have called the petitioner illegally for investigation. This court cannot take notice of allegation, without person being party in individual capacity. 4. The learned counsel for the state however made a statement that respondents 1 and 2 are not interfering with the civil dispute of the petitioner. 5. By recording the statement of learned counsel for the State, writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.