R.Valli v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL W.P(MD) No.10812 of 2025 R.Valli ... Petitioner Vs
1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o Superintendent of Police Sivagangai District.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tiruppathur, Sivagangai District.
3. The Inspector of Police, Nerkuppai Police Station, Sivagangai District.
4. Vaduganathan,
5. Palanichami @ PL.Raja ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action against the respondents 4 and 5 for abusing the Page No. 1 of 5
petitioner using filthy language in the public place and for assaulting the petitioner in the same place by criminally intimidating her, based on the complaints, dated 03.04.2025 and 08.04.2025, within the time frame fixed by this Court.
For petitioner :Mr.S.Ramanathan For R1 to R3 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) *****
O R D E R
This petition is filed by the petitioner to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action against the respondents 4 and 5 for abusing the petitioner using filthy language in the public place and for assaulting the petitioner in the same place by criminally intimidating her, based on the complaints, dated 03.04.2025 and 08.04.2025.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondents 4 and 5 abused the petitioner and assaulted in the public place and also criminally intimidated. Therefore, he lodged a complaint before the fourth respondent on 03.04.2025 and the same was not considered. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a representation on 08.04.2025 and the Page No. 2 of 5
same has also not been considered. Hence, she filed this petition.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that they received complaints from the petitioner and the same was enquired and closed on 10.04.2025 after enquiry.
4. Considering the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court, without issuing notice to the respondents 4 and 5, is inclined to pass orders in this case.
5. According to the petitioner, she lodged the complaints against the respondents 4 and 5, but no action was taken. According to the third respondent, the said complaints were considered and closed after enquiry. Today a copy of the closure report is also served to the petitioner through the learned counsel. Since the complaint of the petitioner was already considered and closed, it is for the petitioner to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
6. In view of the same, preserving the liberty of the petitioner to Page No. 3 of 5
challenge the closure report, in the manner known to law, this Writ Petition is closed.
21.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To
1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o Superintendent of Police Sivagangai District.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tiruppathur, Sivagangai District.
3. The Inspector of Police, Nerkuppai Police Station, Sivagangai District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Page No. 4 of 5
P.DHANABAL,J apd W.P.(MD) No.10812 of 2025 21.04.2025 Page No. 5 of 5