Police should stay off landlord-tenant disputes, as the parties involved can seek remedy only from the competent civil court, the Madras high court has said.
"If there is a landlord-tenant relationship, police are not entitled to inquire the matter. It should advise both the parties to approach the competent civil court or rent control authority," Justice T S Sivagnanam said recently, passing orders on a petition.
The matter relates to a criminal complaint lodged against R Suresh by his landlord P Syed Omar Sajeeth before the Teynampet police on June 7, seeking recovery of rent arrears. In his petition, Suresh said after being summoned to the police station, he and his counsel met the officers handling the matter. Even after his counsel explained that there was absolutely no criminal offence necessitating the summoning of Suresh, police held inquiries. He then moved the high court.
His counsel S Namo Narayanan said police ought not to have entertained the complaint at all, as there was no criminal element in the allegations. The dispute is civil in nature, he said. He sought a direction to the police not to harass Suresh in the name of inquiry.
When the matter was taken up for hearing, additional public prosecutor admitted that an inquiry had indeed been conducted by the Teynampet police. It was, however, closed, he said.
Recording the statement, Justice Sivagnanam pointed out that a police notice served under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was furnished in the court to prove that Suresh had been summoned to the station. Since it is stated that the inquiry is already over, Suresh should not be harassed by police any further, the judge said, disposing of the petition.
"If there is a landlord-tenant relationship, police are not entitled to inquire the matter. It should advise both the parties to approach the competent civil court or rent control authority," Justice T S Sivagnanam said recently, passing orders on a petition.
The matter relates to a criminal complaint lodged against R Suresh by his landlord P Syed Omar Sajeeth before the Teynampet police on June 7, seeking recovery of rent arrears. In his petition, Suresh said after being summoned to the police station, he and his counsel met the officers handling the matter. Even after his counsel explained that there was absolutely no criminal offence necessitating the summoning of Suresh, police held inquiries. He then moved the high court.
His counsel S Namo Narayanan said police ought not to have entertained the complaint at all, as there was no criminal element in the allegations. The dispute is civil in nature, he said. He sought a direction to the police not to harass Suresh in the name of inquiry.
When the matter was taken up for hearing, additional public prosecutor admitted that an inquiry had indeed been conducted by the Teynampet police. It was, however, closed, he said.
Recording the statement, Justice Sivagnanam pointed out that a police notice served under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was furnished in the court to prove that Suresh had been summoned to the station. Since it is stated that the inquiry is already over, Suresh should not be harassed by police any further, the judge said, disposing of the petition.
Comments
Post a Comment