Smt. Jinka Kanthamma, v. The Superintendent Of Police

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.10798 OF 2012 DATED: 25.06.2015 Between:

Smt. Jinka Kanthamma .. Petitioner And The Superintendent of Police, Anantapur, Anantapur District, and others.

.. Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.10798 of 2012 ORDER:

The grievance of the petitioner in this case was that the Station House Officer, Dharmavaram Police Station, Anantapur District, was pressurizing her and her family members to pay money to the 3rd respondent for settlement of a matrimonial dispute and was interfering with their personal life and liberty. The Station House Officer, Dharmavaram Police Station, Anantapur District, furnished written instructions dated 18.04.2012 to the office of the learned Government Pleader for Home, wherein he stated that no complaint had been received and no criminal case was registered against the petitioner on the file of Dharmavaram Police Station. While so, the 3rd respondent herein had lodged a complaint against her husband under Sections 494, 495 and 498-A I.P.C. The husband of the 3rd respondent is none other than the nephew of the petitioner.

As the police were informed that he was staying at the petitioner's house, they went to her house to apprehend him but the petitioner stated that she did not know his whereabouts. The Station House Officer stated that except for this, the police authorities never threatened or harassed the petitioner.

In the light of the afore-stated facts, it is clear that the petitioner's

allegation that the police were interfering with her life and liberty without just cause is without basis. Once her examination is required in the course of investigation into a criminal offence relating to her family members, she can have no objection to the police examining her. Needless to state, the police would be bound to abide by the due procedure laid down by law in this regard while conducting such investigation.

Making this position clear, the writ petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

____________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR 25th June, 2015 IBL