M. Farhana Fathima v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.12.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU M.Farhana Fathima ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendant of Police, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Deputy Superintendant of Police, Ramanathapuram Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Devipattinam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
4.Salman Bhagat 5.Abdullah 6.Jennath Thaga ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to conduct property enquiry upon the petitioner's representation dated 09.11.2020 and take appropriate action against the respondents 4 to 6, within a stipulated time. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Senthil Murugan For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.V.Neelakandan Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
The writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to conduct proper enquiry on the petitioner's representation dated 09.11.2020 and take appropriate action against the respondents 4 to 6. 2.By consent, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
1/3
3. According to the petitioner, she has applied for smart Ration card and with regard to the same, when the Tahsildhar, had visited her house for physical verification on 22.10.2020, the respondents 4 and 5, at the instigation of sixth respondent picked up unnecessary quarrel with the petitioner and abused her in filthy language and assaulted her brutally. The petitioner took treatment in Government Hospital, during which the third respondent obtained signature from the petitioner in blank papers and acted in favour of the respondents 4 to 6. Therefore, the petitioner gave a complaint to the third respondent. Since there was no action taken, the petitioner again sent a detailed representation, dated 09.11.2020 to the respondents, but no action has been taken. Hence, this writ petition. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, would submit that the respondents 1 to 3, will consider and dispose of petitioner's representation, dated 09.11.2020, within a time frame.
5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents 1 to
3. Since no adverse order is going to be passed, notice to respondents 4 to 6 is not necessary.
6.Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, without going into the merits of the case, the respondents 1 to 3 are directed to consider and take appropriate action on the petitioner's representation, dated 09.11.2020, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to the respondents 4 to 6. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order 7.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) rm 2/3
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 Superintendant of Police, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Deputy Superintendant of Police, Ramanathapuram Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Devipattinam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
DATED : 09.12.2020 KVN(CO) KM (18.12.2020) 3P 4C 3/3