Arockiya Amalanalini v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Reserved on: 24.02.2026

Pronounced on: 07.04.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY W.P.Crl.(MD) No.566 of 2026 Arockiya Amalanalini ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The State of Tamilnadu, Represented by the Superintendent of Police, Theni District, Theni.

2. The Inspector of Police, Thevaram Police Station, Theni District.

3. Arulmary 4.George ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 herein to take appropriate action on the petitioner's complaint dated 13.01.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Bharath For R1 & 2 : Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For R3 & R4 : Mr.D.Ramesh Kumar 1/6

ORDER

The petition writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 herein to take appropriate action on the petitioner's complaint dated 13.01.2025.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had married one Arockiyasamy in the year 2001 and is having son and daughter namely Basilarulemil and Vinila. The petitioner's husband was doing business at Devakottai Town, Sivagangai District, hence the petitioner's husband along with the petitioner and children were staying at Devakottai. Unfortunately, the petitioner's husband died on 29.07.2025. Then the petitioner along with her children went to T.Sindhalaichery, the home town and were living there along with the children. Thereafter in order to eke her livelihood again the petitioner left the home town to continue her husband's business at Devakottai.

After that the petitioner went to the native place, wherein the 3rd respondent illegal locked the petitioner's house, when the same was questioned the respondent 3 and 4 along with hooligans gave life threat to the petitioner and her children. Hence the petitioner preferred a complaint dated 13.01.2026 to the respondents 1 and 2, since the same was not taken on file, the present writ petition is filed seeing direction to take action on the complaint.

3. The Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the house was constructed by the petitioner's husband from the income derived from the business at Devakottai and the same belongs to her as legal heir. But the Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 4 submitted that the petitioner's husband is the son of the 3rd respondent and the petitioner is the daughter-in-law of the 3rd respondent. And further submitted that the house belong to the 3rd respondent and the petitioner cannot claim exclusive right over the property.

4. This Court is of the considered opinion that the property may belong to the petitioner's husband or to the petitioner or to the 3rd respondent mother-in-law. But the 3rd respondent cannot exclusive right over the house property and deny entry to the house to the petitioner. Therefore, this Court vide order dated 24.02.2026 granted interim direction permitting the petitioner to take the keys from the 3rd respondent and allow to enjoy the possession of the house property and also restrained the 4th respondent from interfering with the issue.

5.Today it is reported that in spite of the said order, the respondents 3 and 4 have not handed over the keys to the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the same would amount to contempt. In order to give one more opportunity to the respondents 3 and 4 to hand over the keys, this Court is directing the respondents 3 and 4 to hand over the keys to the petitioner forthwith. 3/6

The 2nd respondent is directed to verify whether the respondents 3 and 4 have handed over the keys to the petitioner. If the keys are not handed over to the petitioner, the petitioner is at liberty to report before this Court so that suo motu contempt shall be initiated.

6. As far as the complaint regarding the allegation of giving life threat is concerned, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the complaint and investigate the same. If any criminal offence is made out, appropriate proceedings may be initiated in accordance to law.

7. As far as property dispute is concerned, the parties are at liberty to approach the competent Civil Court to seek remedy regarding the right over the property. Until then the parties shall not take law in their own hands and create any problem.

8. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 07.04.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Tmg 4/6

To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Theni District, Theni

2. The Inspector of Police, Thevaram Police Station, Theni District

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

5/6

S.SRIMATHY, J.

Tmg W.P.Crl(MD)No.566 of 2026 07.04.2026 6/6