Anitha v. The Superintendent Of Police
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10707 of 2020 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.10.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10707 of 2020 Anitha ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
2.The Division Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Madurai Division, West Veli Street, Periyar Nilayam, Madurai-625001 3.The Inspector of Police, Eriyodu Police Station, Dindigul Dsitrict.
4.The Inspector of Police, Railway Protection Force, Eriyodu, Dindigul District.
... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to direct the second and fourth respondents not to harass and foist false case against the petitioner's husband namely Chinnakaruppan and his family members under the guise of enquiry on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 25.09.2020. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Mayilvahana Rajendran For Respondents : Mr.A.P.G.Ohm Chairma Prabhu Government Advocate (Crl. side)
O R D E R
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to direct the respondents 2 and 4 not to harass and foist false case against the petitioner's husband namely Chinnakaruppan and his family members under the guise of enquiry on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 25.09.2020. 2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondents.
3.Today, when the petition is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that against the husband of the petitioner, the second respondent herein initiated the proceedings under Section 3 of Railway Property Unlawful Possession Act and the same is pending on his file. The said submission is recorded. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10707 of 2020 4.In view of the above, it is made clear that as of now, the criminal case has been foisted against the husband of the petitioner. After the registration of the criminal case against the husband of the petitioner, the question of harassment does not arise. In otherwise, if any order is passed in favour of the petitioner, it would amount to interference with the investigation conducted by the second respondent.
5.With the above observation, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar () // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) cp 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 Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
2.The Division Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Madurai Division, West Veli Street, Periyar Nilayam, Madurai-625001.
3.The Inspector of Police, Eriyodu Police Station, Dindigul Dsitrict.
4.The Inspector of Police, Railway Protection Force, Eriyodu, Dindigul District.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Crl.O.P.[MD]No.10707 of 2020 01.10.2020 SCR CO SPU (15.10.2020) 2P 6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2