Bhavadharini v. The Commissioner Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.01.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH Crl.O.P.No.1507 of 2016 Bhavadharini ... Petitioner/Defacto Complainant Vs 1.The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Ayyanavaram, Chennai.

... Respondents Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to register FIR on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 31.12.2015 in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Mohamed Ansar For respondents :

Mr.C.Emalias, Addl.Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The present criminal original petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to register FIR on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 31.12.2015 in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner and one Arumugaraja, Grade II Police Constable had a love affair for four years. On giving false promise, the said Arumugaraja had physical relationship with her. When the petitioner asked him to marry her, he refused to marry her and threatened her with dire consequences. On 16.12.2015 at about 9.00 p.m., the said Arumugaraja trespassed into her house and scolded her in filthy language and brutally attacked her. Hence, the petitioner lodged a complaint with the second respondent police and the second respondent police issued CSR No.1041 of 2015. But, thereafter, no action was taken on the said complaint. Therefore, on 31.12.2015, the petitioner by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

narrating all the facts, preferred a representation to the first respondent to initiate necessary action against the said Arumugaraja. But, till date, no action was taken on the said representation. Hence, the petition.

3. Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is a Woman Constable. The complaint of the petitioner was enquired by the Inspector of Police, W.6 All Women Police Station and she recommended for taking action against the petitioner and counter petitioner and another Constable Rajasekar, Armed Force, since they have not maintained the required discipline in the police department.

4. Since the Inspector of Police has already recommended for taking action against all the three persons, this Court is not inclined to give any direction in this matter.

5. Hence, recording the said submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the criminal original petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to work out her remedy in a manner known to law, if she is so advised.

-s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar sbi To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Ayyanavaram, Chennai.

Chrompet, Chennai-44.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

+1 cc to Mr.S.Mohamed Ansar Advocate sr.5314 Crl.O.P.No.1507 of 2016 aa15/02/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/