A.Divya v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN A.Divya ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendant of Police, Office of the Superintendant of Police, Dindigul, Dindigul District.
2.The Deputy Superintendant Police, Natham Taluk, Natham, Dindigul District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Sanarpatti Police Station, Dindigul District.
4.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Vadamadurai, Dindigul District.
5.Alagarsamy 6.Nagarathinam 7.Chandrasekar 8.Saranya ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the respondent No.3 to give a adequate police protection to the petitioner's life and limb on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 03.06.2021.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Santhakumaresan For R1 to R4 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate(Crl.side) For R5 to R8 : Mr.B.A.Muruganantham
ORDER
This criminal original petition has been filed to direct the respondent No.3 to give a adequate police protection to the petitioner's life and limb on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 03.06.2021.
1/3
2.It is the case of the petitioner that she is B.E., Graduate and employed in IT company at Chennai. She is 27 years old and her parents are making arrangements for her marriage, without her consent, with a person, who is an uneducated, drunkard and vagabond. Hence, she rejected the bridegroom and refused to marry him. However, the respondents 5 to 8 confined her in house arrest and inflicted physical violence against her and forced her to get marry with the above said person. On 27.05.2021, they inflicted injury and the sixth and eighth respondents caught hold of her and the the seventh respondent administered poison in her mouth with an intention to take her life. The petitioner made hue and cry and on hearing the same, the neighbours gathered in front of the house in the street.
On seeing the crowd, the respondents 5 to 8 let her off and admitted her in hospital at Gopalapatti and then, in Dindigul Vadamalaian Hospital for treatment. She gave statement before the Police Constable with regard to the incidents that had happened prior to her admission in the hospital. However, no action was taken. Again, after discharge from the hospital also she was locked in her house and subjected to physical harassment. On the day before filing of this petition, she escaped from the house and filed this petition.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is now residing at V.Kurumbapatti, Vembarpatti Post, Natham Taluk, Dindigul District and she is taken care of by one Machakalai, father of her friend, Sridhar.
4.It is seen from the affidavit filed by the petitioner and Machakalai that the said Sridhar has given consent for marrying the petitioner and Machakalai has also given consent for their marriage. However, it is seen from the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents 5 to 8 that the said Sridhar is a married man and he has a wife.
5.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is a divorce petition pending between the said Sridhar and his wife on the file of the Sub Court, Sivagangai and after disposal of the divorce petition, the said Sridhar will marry the petitioner. 6.This Court is not inclined to go into the details with regard to love affair between the petitioner and the said Sridhar and their proposed marriage. The scope of this petition is very limited as to whether the petitioner should be given police protection or not. 7.It is seen from the submissions made on either side that the petitioner has already given a representation to the respondent police on 03.06.2021 wherein she alleged the illegal confinement, physical harassment and threat she faced from her family members. 2/3
8.The learned counsel for the respondents 5 to 8 now submitted that the respondents 5 to 8 have no objection for the petitioner living separately at the place of her choice. If she is willing to come and live with her parents, they are prepared to take her back and even they are prepared to file an affidavit to the effect that they will not do any harm to the petitioner.
9.Apparently, the petitioner is not willing to go and live with the respondents 5 to 8. In the said circumstances, this Court directs the respondents 1 to 4 to take appropriate action on the representation given by the petitioner on 03.06.2021. The respondents 5 to 8 are directed not to interfere with the personal liberty and safety of the petitioner.
10.With the above observations, this criminal original petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AE) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) NOTE: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To 1.The Superintendant of Police, Office of the Superintendant of Police, Dindigul, Dindigul District.
2.The Deputy Superintendant Police, Natham Taluk, Natham, Dindigul District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Sanarpatti Police Station, Dindigul District. 4.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Vadamadurai, Dindigul District.
5. The Additional Public prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai 09.06.2021 KB(16.06.2021) 3P 6C 3/3