R.Nithiya v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 13/03/2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.OP(MD)No.3525 of 2023 R.Nithiya : Petitioner Vs.

1.The State represented by, The Superintendent of Police, Karur District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Velliyanai Police Station, Karur District.

3.Chitra 4.Mangiyarkanni 5.Kaliammal 6.Sathyapriya Sub Inspector of Police, Veliyanai Police Station, Karur District.

7.Rengaraj, Sub Inspector of Police, Velliyanai Police Station, Karur District.

8.Senthilkumar, Constable, Velliyanai Police Station, Karur District. : Respondents

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to direct the Inspector of Police, Velliyanai Police Station, Karur District, not to harass the petitioner and his family members without following due process of law under the garb of conducting inquest and pass such any or other orders.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Balaji For R1 and R2 : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar Government Advocate (Criminal side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking direction to the Inspector of Police, Velliyanai Police Station, Karur District not to harass the petitioner and his family members without following due process of law. 2.The case of the petitioner is that the respondents 3 to 5 are her neighbours, used to talk degrading her status. On coming to know about such talk, her husband advised her to avoid contact with them. On 28/01/2023 at about 05.00 pm, when she was going to grocery shop, the 3rd respondent abused in filthy language and assaulted. In that place, the others namely the

respondents 4 and 5 gathered and started assaulting her. At that time, her Thali was snatched weighing about 2 sovereigns. She sustained blood injuries. She was taken to the Government Hospital, Karur for treatment. Intimation was sent to the 8th respondent and he visited the hospital and recorded her statement, but not in a proper manner. No action was taken by registering FIR. On 31/01/2023 at about 11.30 am, she approached the second respondent for action. But the respondents 3 to 5 were not summoned. On 11/02/2023, the respondents 3 to 5 came to the station and gave a false complaint stating that this petitioner snatched the chain of the 4th respondent. Again, she was called for enquiry and in the enquiry, she was forced and threatened to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- on or before 20/02/2023. In the light of the above said circumstances, this petition has been filed seeking direction.

3.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that on the basis of the complaint given by the 3rd respondent, enquiry was undertaken and during the course of enquiry, it was found that her husband was in

conduct with the petitioner for about three years. Later, there was compromise between them. Thereafter, there was no relationship. On 28/01/2023 at about 05.00 pm, this petitioner alleged to have abused the 3rd respondent in filthy language. She was also assaulted and her Thali chain was allegedly snatched by this petitioner. On the basis of her complaint, enquiry was conducted in CSR No. 59 of 2023 and in the enquiry, only this petitioner undertook to pay Rs.1,50,000/-, which is the cost of the above said jewel. On that basis, both complaints were closed.

4.From the perusal of the records in CSR No.59 of 2023, it is seen that both parties entered into scuffle with each other, in which both of them sustained injuries. The second respondent ought to have registered proper case against both of them. But instead compromise talk appears to have been conducted, in which the petitioner alleged to have given the above said assurance.

5.What actually happened is a matter for proper enquiry, since it has been stated that both sustained

injuries because of the assault made against each others. So the question of harassment does not arise. The second respondent herein is directed to restore both complaints and enquire the same in accordance with law and proceed. The petitioner is directed to cooperate with the 2nd respondent in completing the enquiry or the investigation as the case may be.

6.With the above said direction, this criminal original petition is dismissed.

13/03/2023 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No er

To, 1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Velliyanai Police Station, Karur District.

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

G.ILANGOVAN, J er Crl.OP(MD)No.3525 of 2023 13.03.2023