Vanitha, v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26.03.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4458 of 2019 Vanitha : Petitioner /Vs./ 1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District, Karur. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Aravakurichi (Rural), Karur District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Aravakurichi Police Station, Karur District.

4.Vadivel 5.A.Vangiliappan 6.Sivakumar : Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and her family membres as per her representation dated 07.03.2019.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Prabha For R-1 to R-3 : Mr.V.Neelakandan Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petitioner complains that she faces threat to her life, limb and liberty at the hands of the respondents 4 to 6.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner made a moving statement that when the petitioner had gone to a temple on 22.02.2019, she was intercepted by the respondents 4 to 6, that she was beaten or molested by them, that she had gone to the police station to prefer a complaint, but she was again beaten by the private respondents, that she was admitted in some private hospital and the hospital too had given a intimation to the police, but no action was taken and the petitioner too did not take any further efforts to have a case registered on the occurrence, yet she is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

still continuing to face threat from the respondents 4 to 6. she added that there is some dispute between the parties.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that if threat presumption is genuine, the police can attend to that and as to the first part of the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the police is yet to receive the complaint.

5. If the alleged threat perception of the petitioner is real and genuine, then, she may prefer a fresh representation and on such fresh complaint, the third respondent shall cause such necessary enquiry to ascertain if the same is true and then, take such appropriate decision as may be necessary to protect the life, liberty and right to the property of the petitioner.

6. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

7. It is made clear that this Court does not order granting of police protection 24 x 7 and the third respondent is left to decide on the basis of the objective assessment of the threat perception of the petitioner from time to time.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl.Side) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District, Karur. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Aravakurichi (Rural), Karur District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Aravakurichi Police Station, Karur District.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Karur Bench of Madras High Court, Karur.

+1cc to Mr.S.Prabha,Advocate, SR.No.56913 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4458 of 2019 26.03.2019 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ SP/27.04.2019/ 2P/6C