← Library
Madras High CourtWP Crl./813/2026closed

S.Srinithi v. The Superintendent Of Police

2026-04-21Honourable Mr Justice M. Nirmal Kumar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR S.Srinithi, Aged 27, D/o.Senthil Kumaran, 100- Brinthavanam Layout, Begepalli Post, Sipcot, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

... Petitioner vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Krishnagiri District.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Krishnagiri.

3.Senthil Kumar, S/o.Velu, No.2/60 Kallar Kottai, Ambur, Kodayanchi, Vellore-635801.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to conduct and conclude the enquiry in C.S.R.No.509 of 2025 dated 29.12.2025 on the file of the 2nd respondent and take appropriate action against the 3rd respondent based on the petitioner's complaint dated 18.09.2025 and 16.10.2025 within a reasonable time as may be fixed by this Court. Page No.1 of 4

For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Vigeshwar For R1 & R2 :

Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Ms.Harshana.T

ORDER

This Writ Petition Criminal has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent Police to conduct and conclude the enquiry in C.S.R.No.509 of 2025 dated 29.12.2025 and take appropriate action against the 3rd respondent based on the petitioner's complaint dated 18.09.2025 and 16.10.2025. 2.Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is residing with her parents along with her 31⁄2-year-old son. Initially, the 3rd respondent showed interest in the petitioner and proposed his love, which she refused. While studying third year, the petitioner agreed to the proposal. During the fourth year, the 3rd respondent informed her that his father was ill and took the petitioner to Venugopal Swamy Temple, where he tied a thali on 02.07.2020. The 3rd respondent's mother and brother-in-law attended the marriage.

Thereafter, for one reason or another, the petitioner was not taken to the matrimonial home. Later, the petitioner came to know that the 3rd respondent was already married to one Priya. When the petitioner questioned the same, she was abused, assaulted and threatened. Hence, for Page No.

cruelty and bigamy, the petitioner lodged a complaint with the 2nd respondent police. Since no action was taken, the present petition has been filed. 3.Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that both petitioner and 3rd respondent called for enquiry, at that time, the petitioner called the 3rd respondent to come and live in the matrimonial home, but she refused and lodged the complaint to the 2nd respondent Police. The petitioner further informed that she is no more interest in continuing her matrimonial life with the 3rd respondent and she intends to approach the Family Court seeking to nullify her marriage. 4.Recording the submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this Writ Petition Criminal is closed. No costs. 21.04.2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order vv2 Page No.3 of 4

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

vv2 To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Krishnagiri District.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Krishnagiri.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

21.04.2026 Page No.4 of 4