Madras High Court

After Harassment Plea, Madras HC Directs Written Police Summonses, Station-Diary Records And No Harassment During Enquiries

Varadhan vs State rep.by

Madras High CourtJUDGMENT: October 15, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
After Harassment Plea, Madras HC Directs Written Police Summonses, Station-Diary Records And No Harassment During Enquiries. Varadhan vs State rep.by. Madras High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioners sought relief under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), alleging that the second respondent police were harassing them under the guise of an enquiry, following a representation dated 3 June 2026.

Source reference: pp. 2–3

The Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that a petition enquiry was pending on the complaint of the third respondent.

Source reference: p. 3

The Court considered the complaint of harassment and issued general safeguards for police enquiries.

Source reference: pp. 4–5
02

Issues

Whether the Court should intervene under Section 528 BNSS to restrain the police from allegedly harassing the petitioners during a pending enquiry.

Source reference: pp. 3–4

Whether safeguards should be prescribed for summoning persons and conducting police enquiries to prevent harassment.

Source reference: pp. 4–5
03

Law Applied

Section 528 BNSS confers inherent powers on the High Court, but the Court ordinarily will not interfere with a police investigation legitimately conducted within Chapter XIII BNSS; nor does the Magistrate have power to interfere with the actual investigation or its mode.

Source reference: p. 4

Section 179 BNSS provides for written summons to persons required to attend for an enquiry or investigation, and the Court directed that such summons specify a date and time.

Source reference: p. 5

The Court also directed compliance with the Supreme Court’s guidelines on preliminary enquiries and FIR registration in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 2 SCC 1.

Source reference: p. 5
04

Reasoning

The Court recognised that police have authority to conduct enquiries and investigations, but that this authority must be exercised legitimately and within the statutory framework.

Source reference: p. 4

It also acknowledged that “harassment” may be understood differently by the persons summoned and the police officer, making procedural safeguards appropriate.

Source reference: p. 5

Rather than determine the petitioners’ allegation or halt the pending enquiry, the Court prescribed safeguards: written summons under Section 179 BNSS, recording enquiry minutes in the relevant police diary, refraining from harassment, and adherence to Lalita Kumari.

Source reference: p. 5
05

Holding

The Court disposed of the petition with observations and directions, without restraining the police from proceeding with the pending enquiry.

It directed police officers to summon persons in writing with a specified date and time, record enquiry minutes in the station diary or equivalent record, refrain from harassment, and comply with the Lalita Kumari guidelines.

Source reference: p. 5
06

Acts & Sections Cited

2 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20232

Madras High Court

Original Court PDF

VaradhanvsState rep.by

Madras High Court · October 15, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment