M. Priyadharshini v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 26.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Crl.O.P(MD).No.5571 of 2025 M.Priyadharshini .. Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Samayanallur, Madurai District.
3.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Samayanallur, Madurai District.
4.S.R.Karthikeyan 5.Pandeeswari .. Respondents Prayer : Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS to direct the third respondent not to harass the petitioner and her family members on the basis of her representation dated 20.03.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Arunraj 1/6
For R1 to R3 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.side)
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner to direct the third respondent not to harass the petitioner and her family members on the basis of her representation dated 20.03.2025.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the fourth respondent is her husband and the fifth respondent is the sister of the fourth respondent. Based on the complaint given by the fourth respondent, the third respondent called the petitioner for enquiry frequently and harassed her. According to the petitioner, already in the complaint given by the fourth respondent against the petitioner, enquiry was conducted and closed, inspite of that, the third respondent frequently called the petitioner. Therefore, she sent representation on 20.03.2025, but the same has not been considered. Hence, this petition.
2/6
3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), on instructions, would submit that earlier the fourth respondent lodged a complaint as against the petitioner and the same was enquired and closed on 23.02.2025 and again, the fourth respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioner on 24.03.2025 through postal and the same is under investigation, for which purpose only, the petitioner was called and she was not harassed. He further would submit that the respondent-police will complete the enquiry within one week.
4. Considering the prayer sought for in this writ petition, this Court, without issuing notice to the respondents 4 and 5, is inclined to pass order in this petition.
5. According to the petitioner, the third respondent frequently called her, without any reason and already, the complaint given by the fourth respondent was enquired and closed by the third respondent, inspite of that, he frequently called the petitioner for enquiry. The alleged harassment as stated in the petition was denied by the learned 3/6
Government Advocate (Crl.side) stating that the petitioner was called for enquiry, based on the complaint given by the fourth respondent. Earlier complaint of the fourth respondent was enquiry and closed on 23.02.2025 and thereafter, the fourth respondent again sent a complaint on 24.03.2025 and the same is under enquiry. In the meanwhile, the petitioner sent a representation on 20.03.2015, even prior to the receipt of the complaint, dated 24.03.2025, after closure report of the earlier complaint dated 23.02.2025. Therefore, recording to the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) that the third respondent has not harassed the petitioner and only called the petitioner for enquiry, this Criminal Original Petition is closed.
26.03.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Rmk 4/6
To:
1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Samayanallur, Madurai District.
3.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Samayanallur, Madurai District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
P. DHANABAL ,J.
Rmk Crl.O.P(MD).No.5571 of 2025 26.03.2025 6/6