Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/8583/2016disposed of

M.Vijayamaheswari v. The Superintendent Of Police

2016-06-03Honourable Dr. Justice S. Vimala2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.06.2016

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE S.VIMALA Crl.O.P.(MD) No.8583 of 2016 M.Vijayamaheswari ... Petitioner -vs1. The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

2. State represented by The Inspector of Police, Karimedu Police Station, Madurai District.

... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct respondents particularly the second respondent to give police protection to the petitioner and petitioner's husband and family members of the petitioner's husband based on the representation dated 02.06.2016 in accordance with law. For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Muneeswaran For Respondents :

Mrs.S.Prabha Government Advocate (Crl.side) for R.1 and R.2

O R D E R

This application is filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the the second respondent to give police protection to the petitioner and petitioner's husband and family members of the petitioner's husband based on the representation dated 02.06.2016 in accordance with law.

2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who takes notice for the respondents.

3. The petitioner herein is an M.A. Graduate student studying second year. According to her, she has fallen in love with her uncle's son and she wanted to marry him. The petitioner's father is working as Special Sub-Inspector of Police at Sivakasi Town Police Station. It appears that he is not interested in the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

marriage between the petitioner and her uncle's son namely Varadharajan. The petitioner is said to have married her uncle's son Varadharajan on 26.04.2016 and the complaint has been lodged before the respondents on 27.04.2016 as well as on 02.06.2016. It is stated in the complaint that on account of the dislike in the marriage, the relatives on the side of the petitioner's husband are being tortured. Apprehending that their life is at risk, the petitioner has sought for police protection.

4. As the father of the petitioner himself is working in police department, this Court wanted the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) to take steps to give police protection to the petitioner.

5. There is a positive undertaking given by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) to afford sufficient police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and her husband, based on the representation given by the petitioner dated 02.06.2016.

6. Recording the undertaking given by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Writ) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To:

1. The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Karimedu Police Station, Madurai District.

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

+1cc to Mr.M.Muneeswaran, Advocate, Sr.No.27709 ssl JM/AAL-MPA/10.06.2016/2P-5C Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8583 of 2016 03.06.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/