Esubbu Nachiyar v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.03.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Esubbu Nachiyar ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

3. Sumathi ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent No.1 and 2 herein to conduct enquiry and take appropriate action against the respondent No.3 upon the petitioner's complaint dated 09.06.2023 and 29.07.2024 within a stipulated time period in accordance with law.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Vishnuram For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi (R1,R2) Additional Public Prosecutor 1/5

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondent No.1 and 2 to conduct enquiry and take appropriate action against the respondent No.3 upon the petitioner's complaint dated 09.06.2023 and 29.07.2024. 2.According to the petitioner, the third respondent is her daughterin-law. She has made a complaint against the third respondent for the illegal trespass and break open the door before the 2nd respondent on 09.06.2023. They have assigned CSR No.195/2023, thereafter, no action was taken. Therefore, she has sent another representation on 29.07.2024 and the same was not considered. Hence, this petition. 3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that the third respondent is none other than the daughter-in-law of the petitioner. There is a family dispute between them, thereby, the petitioner has lodged a complaint against the third respondent and the second respondent had assigned CSR No. 195/2023 and the same was closed after enquiry. While so, again for the same incident, the petitioner has sent another representation on 2/5

29.07.2024, thereafter, the petitioner did not appear for enquiry and not co-operate for enquiry and the representation of the petitioner is still pending with the second respondent.

4.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court, without even issuing notice to the private respondent, is inclined to dispose of the petition. 5.According to the petitioner, she lodged a complaint against the third respondent before the second respondent but the same has not been considered. Again she sent another representation on 29.07.2024 and the same was not considered.

6.According to the second respondent, there is a family dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent, thereby, the petitioner has lodged a complaint against the third respondent on 09.06.2023 and the same was closed after enquiry. Again for the same incident, the petitioner has sent another representation on 29.07.2024, thereafter, the petitioner did not appear for enquiry.

3/5

7.In view of the above, it is appropriate to direct the petitioner to appear before the second respondent on 05.04.2025, thereafter, the second respondent is directed to complete the enquiry and dispose of the representation of the petitioner within a period of one week from the date of this order.

8.With the above observations and direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

27.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No PNM To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

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

4/5

P.DHANABAL , J.

PNM ORDER IN 27.03.2025 5/5