Madras High CourtWP(MD)/18047/2021disposed of

Visalatchi.A v. The Director General Of Police

2021-10-04Honourable Mr Justice G.Ilangovan3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.10.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN W.P.(MD) No.18047 of 2021 A.Visalatchi ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, Dr.Radhakrishnan Road, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Alagar Kovil Main Road, K.Pudur, Madurai 625 002.

3.The Deputy Commissioner of Police(Law & order), Office of the Commissioner of Police, Alagar Kovil Main Road, K.Pudur, Madurai 625 002.

4.The Inspector of Police, S.S.Colony Police Station, S.S.Colony, Madurai.

... Respondents PRAYER:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents No.1 and 2 to take appropriate action against the respondent No.4 as per the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court of India in Lalitha Kumari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1 by considering the petitioner's representation submitted to the respondents No.1 to 3 dated 07.09.2021 in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Vignesh For Respondents : Mr.RMS.Sethuraman Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take action, on the basis of the representation dated 07.09.2021 within the time stipulated by this Court.

1/3

2.When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents would submit that it is purely a dispute between the petitioner and her daughter-in-law and her son. Based upon the complaint given by this petitioner, enquiry was undertaken in CSR.No.679 of 2021 and finding that it is a property dispute between the mother and in law and the son, it was closed, directing the parties to workout their remedies through proper civil proceedings.

3.The petitioner has given a statement to the effect that she will workout her remedy through proper civil proceedings. The daughter-in-law has appeared before the Enquiry Officer and gave a statement to the effect that on the particular date of occurrence, ie., on 12.08.2021, she was not available in the place of occurrence. Based upon the statement given by both the parties, the complaint came to be closed.

4.Since the complaint given by this petitioner has been closed, nothing survives for further consideration or direction in this petition. The parties have to workout their remedy before the appropriate civil Court through appropriate civil proceedings. 5.With the aforesaid direction, this petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (W) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) mm To 1.The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, Dr.Radhakrishnan Road, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Alagar Kovil Main Road, K.Pudur, Madurai 625 002.

3.The Deputy Commissioner of Police(Law & order), Office of the Commissioner of Police, Alagar Kovil Main Road, K.Pudur, Madurai 625 002.

2/3

4.The Inspector of Police, S.S.Colony Police Station, S.S.Colony, Madurai.

04.10.2021 MGJ(26.10.2021) 3P 5C 3/3