Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/4945/2019disposed of

V.Nithiya v. The Superintendent Of Police

2019-04-02Honourable Mr Justice N. Seshasayee2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.04.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4945 of 2019 V.Nithiya ... Petitioner /Vs./ 1.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District, Pudukottai.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Ganesh Nagar Police Station, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

4.Karuppiah 5.Manikandan 6.Ayyanar ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to grant police protection to the petitioner and her husband in pursuant to the complaint dated 25.03.2019.

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

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 3 grant police protection to the petitioner and her husband in pursuant to the complaint dated 25.03.2019.

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

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, a middle aged woman, has married a man of her choice from another community, and faces the wrath of her father, brother and relatives.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the complaint preferred by the petitioner is pending. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5. Inasmuch as the complaint preferred by the petitioner is pending enquiry, the third respondent is directed to enquire into the complaint filed by the petitioner and take such appropriate decision as may be necessary to protect the life, limb and liberty of the petitioner.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner now shows certain photographs indicating the act of trespass by the private respondents.

7. In view of the above submission, the respondent police is also reminded that if the complaint discloses commission of any cognizable offence, they shall follow the principles in the judgment reported in 2013 (6) CTC 353 [Lalitha Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh].

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

9. 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 (CS III) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District, Pudukottai.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Ganesh Nagar Police Station, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

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

+1cc to Mr.S.Sankar, Advocate, SR.No. 58435 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4945 of 2019 02.04.2019 SM KK/SAR/02.05.2019/ 2P- 6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/