Mohanapriya @ Priya v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.12.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Mohanapriya @ Priya ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Karur.

3.Sakthi Saravanan @ Sakthivel ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to give suitable direction to the 2nd respondent to provide police protection to the petitioner's life and limb by conducting proper enquiry as per the petitioner's complaint dated 23.11.2019 and representation dated 1/5

09.12.2019 to the 1st respondent within a stipulated time. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Gokulraj For Respondents : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 & R2

O R D E R

The Writ Petition is for a direction to take action on the petitioner's complaint dated 23.11.2019.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner married the third respondent on 16.12.2012 and the third respondent had obtained consent by undue influence. Thereafter, the petitioner and the third respondent been living separately. The third respondent had been continuously threatening the petitioner with dire consequences if she did not give consent for divorce. The petitioner thereafter came to know that the third respondent is a notorious criminal. Hence, she gave a complaint on 23.11.2019 against him and no action was taken by the respondents.

2/5

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that it is true that the third respondent is a notorious criminal. However, after investigation, they found that the allegations of the petitioner is unfounded and hence, they closed the CSR No.368/2019 issued on the petitioner's complaint.

4. Since the respondents have already taken action on the petitioner's complaint and closed the complaint, nothing survives in this writ petition for further adjudication. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the action taken by the respondents, it is open for her to pursue other remedies in accordance with law.

5. With the above observation, this writ petition is dismissed. No Costs.

23.12.2022 Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No PJL 3/5

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Karur.

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

4/5

SUNDER MOHAN,J.

PJL W.P(MD)No.19889 of 2020 23.12.2022 5/5