Suriya v. The Superintendent Of Police

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.9813 of 2019 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 31.01.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR Crl.O.P.(MD)No.9813 of 2019 Suriya ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District, Karur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Aravakurichi Police Station, Karur District.

3.Sakthivel ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to provide police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and her tender aged child namely Dharneeswaran, on the basis of the representation dated 04.07.2019. For Petitioner : Mrs.Prabha for Mr.S.Gokul Raj For Respondents :Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 & R2 Mr.R.Mathiyalagan for R3

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to provide police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and her tender aged child, namely, Dharneeswaran, on the basis of the representation, dated 04.07.2019.

2.Admittedly, the marriage between the petitioner and the third respondent was solemnized in the year 2013 and thereafter, due to wedlock, they had two children, namely, Yalini and Dharneeswaran and that subsequently, there was some misunderstanding between them and are living separately.

3.On hearing the submissions made by the both the counsels, this Court has referred the matter to mediation and mediation report has been received on 27.01.2022 stating that the mediation could not succeed.

4.When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that she was not getting any instructions and there was no response to the letters sent to the petitioner.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.9813 of 2019 5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that their efforts to get the petitioner was of no avail and her whereabouts are not known.

6.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the copy of the statement given by the third respondent, whereunder, he had stated that the petitioner had married one Karthikeyan in the year 2019 and thereafter, her whereabouts are not known. 7.According to the third respondent, both the children are with him and the above petition is pending from the year 2019 onwards. 8.Considering the fact that whereabouts of the petitioner are not known and also taking note of the fact that the learned counsel for the petitioner had reported no instructions, keeping the above case pending would not serve any purpose and hence, the same is liable to be dismissed.

9.In the result, this criminal original petition is dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AE) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) csm 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, Karur District, Karur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Aravakurichi Police Station, Karur District.

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

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.9813 of 2019 31.01.2022 IMS(CO) GC(11.02.2022) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2