Factual Matrix 

In the case Rajini v. Superintendent of Police In a criminal original petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner is asking for instructions to the police not to harass him or her unless the law has provided rules for them to observe during an investigation that prohibit them from harassing people. While the respondent Police indicated that an investigation into a complaint against the petitioner was ongoing and that a notice under Section 41-A of the CrPC had been issued, the petitioner claimed that she had been harassed by the police while they were conducting an inquiry.

Madras High Court verdict 

Justice Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup of the Madras High Court’s single-judge bench noted that the Investigating Officer has unrestricted authority to investigate actual Matrix 

In the case Rajini v. Superintendent of Police In a criminal original petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner is asking for instructions to the police not to harass him or her unless the law has provided rules for them to observe during an investigation that prohibit them from harassing people. While the respondent Police indicated that an investigation into a complaint against the petitioner was ongoing and that a notice under Section 41-A of the CrPC had been issued, the petitioner claimed that she had been harassed by the police while they were conducting an inquiry.

Justice Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup of the Madras High Court’s single-judge bench noted that the Investigating Officer has unrestricted authority to investigate a crime, whether it is criminal or not, so long as this authority is lawfully exercised in compliance with CrPC Chapter 12. It further noted that, according to CrPC, the magistrate does not have the authority to impede an inquiry because they often function as a guardian over police investigations. The Court made it plain that, under Section 482 of the CrPC, it would typically not interfere with police investigations, but that it would not ignore instances of police harassment that were concealed as an investigation.

The court also pointed out that the definition of “harassment” is extremely broad and may have different connotations for the police officers and the petitioner, respectively. As a law-abiding citizen of the country, you must urgently appear before the police officer regarding the notification under Section 41-A of the CrPC. Therefore, the criminal original petition was dismissed by the court.

 a crime, whether it is criminal or not, so long as this authority is lawfully exercised in compliance with CrPC Chapter 12. It further noted that, according to CrPC, the magistrate does not have the authority to impede an inquiry because they often function as a guardian over police investigations. The Court made it plain that, under Section 482 of the CrPC, it would typically not interfere with police investigations, but that it would not ignore instances of police harassment that were concealed as an investigation.

The court also pointed out that the definition of “harassment” is extremely broad and may have different connotations for the police officers and the petitioner, respectively. As a law-abiding citizen of the country, you must urgently appear before the police officer regarding the notification under Section 41-A of the CrPC. Therefore, the criminal original petition was dismissed by the court.