Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/12820/2020disposed of

Leema Mahadevi v. The Commissioner Of Police

2020-11-11Honourable Mrs Justice J. Nisha Banu3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.11.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU Leema Mahadevi ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner of Police Madurai City 2.The State represented by The Inspector of Police (L&O) S.S.Colony Police Station 3.Manikandan ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, to issue a direction, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to provide adequate police protection based on the petitioner's complaint dated 16.10.2020.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Krishnan For R1 and R2 : Mr.V.Neelakandan, Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to issue a direction, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to provide adequate police protection based on the petitioner's complaint dated 16.10.2020.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is running a chit funds for the past 10 years, in this regard, there was a dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent. Thereafter, the third respondent entered into the petitioner's medical store and assaulted him. Hence, the petitioner lodged a complaint before the respondent police. Based on the complaint, a case was registered in Crime No.105 of 2020 for the alleged offence under Sections 147, 451, 448, 342, 354, 323, 384, 506(i) and 379 I.P.C. Since no action has been taken, the petitioner approached this Court in Crl.O.P(MD).No.10094 of 2020 and this Court directed the second respondent to file the final report. When the third respondent knowing the above facts, threatened the petitioner to withdraw the said Criminal Original Petition. Against which, the 1/3

petitioner again lodged a complaint before the respondents 1 and 2 on 16.10.2020. Till now, no action has been taken. Hence, the present petition.

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 & 2, on instructions, would submit that based on the complaint, enquiry has been conducted and the same was closed. 4.Per contra, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the third respondent again threatened the petitioner with dire consequence. Hence, the petitioner made a complaint, dated 16.10.2020 to the respondent police seeking to provide adequate police protection.

5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.

6.Considering the submission made on either side, the respondents 1 and 2 are directed to consider the complaint of the petitioner, dated 16.10.2020, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and give police protection to the petitioner, if necessary. If it is found that police protection is not necessary, the same shall be communicated to the petitioner so that she can work out her rights in the manner known to law.

7.With the above direction, this criminal original petition is disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) msa 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 Commissioner of Police Madurai City 2/3

2.The State represented by The Inspector of Police (L&O) S.S.Colony Police Station 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

11.11.2020 VB (27.11.2020) 3P 4C 3/3