← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/14636/2020dismissed as infructuous

C.Nepolean v. The Superintendent Of Police

2021-09-09Honourable Mr Justice G.Ilangovan2 pages

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14636 of 2020 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :09.09.2021 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14636 of 2020 C.Nepolean ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The State Rep.by, The Superintendant of Police, Superintendent of Police Office, Ilathur Road, Tenkasi District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Pavoor Chatram Police Station, Pavoor Chatram, Tenkasi District.

3.Chinnaraja ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the respondents to give police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner's family based on the petitioner's representation dated 07.12.2020.

For Petitioners : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar For RR1 & 2 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor.

ORDER

This Petition has been filed to direct the respondents to give police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner's family based on the petitioner's representation dated 07.12.2020.

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that based upon the representation made by the petitioner, enquiry was undertaken in C.S.R.No.931 of 2020. During the course of the enquiry, the wife of the petitioner and the third respondent, who was working as driver in the petitioner's house, appeared before the enquiry Officer and gave statement to the effect that the complaint has been wrongly given and it was closed on 19.12.2020, since there was no cooperation from the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14636 of 2020

3. Similarly, on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner, enquiry was also undertaken in Ref.No.351/SP/2020 and during the course of enquiry, the petitioner has submitted that because of the difference of opinion between the petitioner and his second wife, a wrong complaint has been given implicating the third respondent. So, on that ground, it was closed and the closure report has also been circulated to this Court, wherein, it is stated that the petitioner did not appear before the enquiry officer and only the third respondent appeared and gave statement to the effect that because of the difference of opinion, he has also been implicated in the complaint. Since the representation and the complaint given by the petitioner has been closed, nothing survives for further adjudication in this petition.

4. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of as infructuous.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (W) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) ssb 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, Superintendent of Police Office, Ilathur Road,Tenkasi District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Pavoor Chatram Police Station, Pavoor Chatram,Tenkasi District.

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

+1 CC to M/s.G.GANESH KUMAR, Advocate (SR-28895[F] dated 13/09/2021) Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14636 of 2020 09.09.2021 RK (24.09.2021) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2