Kalaiselvi v. The District Superintendent Of Police, Tiruvannamalai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.04.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN Kalaiselvi ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Superintendent of Police, Office of the District Superintendent Office, Vengikaal, Tiruvannamalai - 606 604.
2.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner Office, Thiruppur City, Thiruppur District 3.The State Rep by, The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kadaladi Police Station, Tiruvannamalai - 606 908.
4.R.Thangaraj ... Respondents PRAYER : This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to direct the 1st and 3rd respondent to consider the representation dated 10.03.2023, relating to provide Police protection for the petitioner and the petitioner's husband to protect his life from any untoward incident. 1/5
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Abdul Mubeen For Respondents : Mr.S.Santhosh (For R1 to R3) Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the 1st and 3rd respondent to consider the representation dated 10.03.2023, relating to provide Police protection for the petitioner and the petitioner's husband. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner got married to one Sakthivel. Both belong to different communities. Petitioner's father R.Thangaraj, namely fourth respondent filed H.C.P.No.328 of 2023 alleging that, the whereabouts of his daughter is not known and she was missing from 27.01.2023. During the hearing of Habeas Corpus Petition, it was brought to the notice that Sakthivel and petitioner got married and it is not a case to illegal detention or illegal custody and therefore, H.C.P.No.328 of 2023 was disposed accordingly.
Now petitioner and her husband received threat from some elements, for the reason that though they belong to different communities and that they got married. Thus, this petition filed seeking Police protection to save their life from threat. In this regard, petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent on 10.03.2023. No order is passed so far.
petition.
3.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) submitted that petitioner's representation will be considered appropriately. 4.In the light of the submission of learned counsel appearing for parties, this Court directs the respondent to consider petitioner's representation dated 10.03.2023, and pass appropriate orders, taking into consideration, the allegations made in the representation that her father had made a death threat to her and her husband, immediately on the receipt of copy of this order, in the manner known to law.
5.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed. 21.04.2023 ep Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order 3/5
To 1.The District Superintendent of Police, Office of the District Superintendent Office, Vengikaal, Tiruvannamalai - 606 604.
2.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner Office, Thiruppur City, Thiruppur District 3.The State Rep by, The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kadaladi Police Station, Tiruvannamalai - 606 908.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
4/5
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN.J., ep 21.04.2023 5/5