Madras HC Lays Down Guidelines To Curb Police Harassment During Enquiry, Investigation

The Madras High Court has issued a set of guidelines to check police harassment of individuals summoned for enquiry or investigation, holding that officers cannot use the process of investigation as a cover to browbeat those named in a complaint.

A Bench of Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan was hearing a plea filed by R. Raja, a resident of T. Nagar, Chennai, who moved the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a direction to the Chennai police to consider his representation dated June 20, 2026. Raja had invoked the inherent powers of the Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (Section 482 of CrPC), alleging that the police were harassing him under the pretext of an enquiry.

The petitioner was represented by advocate L. Infant Dinesh, while the Commissioner of Police, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, and the Inspector of Police (Law and Order), R-1 Mambalam Police Station, were represented by government counsel R. Ganesh Kumar, appearing for the State.

The Court began its order by clarifying the limited scope of judicial interference in a police investigation. It observed that conducting an enquiry into a cognizable or non-cognizable offence is the "unfettered" power of an investigating officer, so long as it is exercised within the framework of Chapter XIII of the BNSS. While the Sanhita empowers a magistrate to act as a guardian at every stage of a police investigation, the Court noted, it does not envisage any power for the magistrate to interfere with the actual investigation or the manner in which it is conducted.

The Bench, however, flagged a pattern it said was becoming increasingly common: a rising number of petitions alleging harassment by police officials while probing complaints. "Numerous petitions complaining of harassment are being reported and filed before this Court seeking for directions to refrain the police officials from harassing the persons named in a complaint," the order noted.

The Court acknowledged that it would ordinarily not interfere with a police investigation while exercising its powers under Section 528 of the BNSS (Section 482, CrPC). "Nevertheless, it would also not turn a blind eye to instances of harassment by the police under the guise of investigation," it said.

At the same time, the Bench pointed to the difficulty in objectively defining what amounts to harassment, since the term "has a very wide meaning" and what one person perceives as harassment "may not be the same to the police officer."

To address this, the Court laid down four guidelines to govern how such enquiries or investigations are to be conducted:

First, any person named in a complaint, or any witness to the incident, must be summoned only through a written summons issued under Section 179 of the BNSS (Section 160 CrPC), specifying a particular date and time for appearance.

Second, the minutes of every such enquiry must be recorded in the general diary, station diary, or daily diary of the concerned police station.

Third, the police officer conducting the enquiry has been directed to "refrain himself or herself from harassing persons called upon for enquiry/investigation."

Fourth, the Court directed that the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others (2014) for conducting a preliminary enquiry or registering an FIR "shall be strictly adhered to."

With these directions, the Court disposed of the writ petition, without imposing any costs.

Case Title: R. Raja vs. The Commissioner of Police and others

Date of Order: August 3, 2026

Bench: Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan

Tags: