R.Sumaiya Banu v. The Director General Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.07.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN CRL.O.P.(MD).No.10168 of 2019 1.R.Sumaiya Banu 2.Selvakumar : Petitioners Vs.
1.The Director General of Police, DGP Office, Radhakrishnan Nagar, Mylapore, Chennai-9.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District, Pudukottai.
4.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Nilakottai, Dindigul District.
5.The Inspector of Police, Ramanasamuthiram Police Station, Pudukottai District.
6.Mahabu Begam 7.Anarkali 8.Wahab 9.Muhaideen 10.Subbiah 11.Sahul : Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to give the adequate Police protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners, since they are different religion and live in one roof with their consensus. For Petitioners : Mr.M.Venkatesan For R-1 to R-5 : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 5 to give adequate Police protection to the petitioners.
2.The grievance of the petitioners is that the first and the second petitioner belong to different religion, now, they got married. After their marriage, the respondents 6 to 11, who are the parents and relatives of the first petitioner made life threat to the petitioners. In the said circumstances, the petitioners filed a petition before the fourth respondent seeking for Police protection. Since no action has been taken by the respondent Police, the petitioners have filed the present petition.
3.Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the State, on instructions, submitted that now based on the complaint given by the petitioners, enquiry has been conducted in which both the parents and the relatives of the petitioners appeared for enquiry, during enquiry, the parents of the first petitioner has given a statement that they did not make any threat to the petitioners. The first petitioner also made a statement before the respondent Police that no further action is required in the complaint made by her. Considering all these circumstances, the third respondent, recording the statement of the first petitioner and her parents closed the complaint.
4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the complaint has been enquired and closed after recording the statement of the concerned parties, nothing survives for further adjudication in this petition. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To 1.The Director General of Police, DGP Office, Radhakrishnan Nagar, Mylapore, Chennai-9.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District, Pudukottai.
4.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Nilakottai, Dindigul District.
5.The Inspector of Police, Ramasamuthiram Police Station, Pudukottai District.
6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1cc to Mr.M.VENKATESAN,Advocate, SR.No.76339 tsg Order made in CRL.O.P.(MD).No.10168 of 2019 Dated:19.07.2019 NA (02.08.2019) 3P : 8C