Malaiammal v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.09.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Malaiammal, W/o.Raja ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thiruthangal, Virudhuagar District.

3.Raja, S/o.Nanthagopal 4.Sithagi, W/o.Duraimuthu 5.Duraimuthu 6.Mariammal, W/o.Nanthagopal ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action on the petitioner's complaints, dated 30.09.2021 and 16.10.2021.

1/5

For Petitioner :

Mr.T.Indrachithu For R1 and R2 :

Mr.R.Meenakshisundaram Additional Public Prosecutor For R3 :

No Appearance

ORDER

The petitioner, who is the wife of the third respondent, lodged complaints dated 30.09.2021 and 16.10.2021 with the respondents 1 and 2, making serious allegations of demand of dowry, harassment, retention of dowry and Stridhana articles by the third respondent and his family members. Despite the same, no action has been taken. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

2. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the marriage between the petitioner and the third respondent was solemnized on 17.01.2021. Within six months from the date of inception of the marriage, there were some disputes between them. The petitioner was often visiting her parents' house and not living with the third respondent. On 14.07.2021 when both the petitioner and the third respondent were called for enquiry, the petitioner gave an undertaking that she will reconcile the issues within 2/5

one week and thereafter, she will join with the third respondent. On the contrary, she failed to join with the third respondent. Therefore, on the request made by the third respondent before the respondent Police, again, on 22.09.2021, she was called for enquiry, wherein she wanted to live with the third respondent alone in a separate house and such course was not agreeable to the third respondent. The third respondent had given an undertaking that all the Stridhana articles can be collected by the petitioner at any time and there is no jewel or any valuables retained by him. Further, both the parties agreed to resolve their disputes through Court of law and therefore, C.S.R.No.407/2021, dated 14.07.2021, which was assigned based on the complaint of the third respondent, has been closed. Thereafter, the petitioner gave the present complaints, dated 30.09.2021 and 16.10.2021, to the respondents 1 and 2 and filed this Writ Petition, seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action on the said complaints.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submits that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, dated 30.09.2021, the petitioner was called for enquiry by the first respondent on 05.10.2021 and she failed to participate in the enquiry and resolve the dispute between her 3/5

and the third respondent and therefore, the said complaint has also been closed and therefore, nothing survives for further adjudication in this Writ Petition.

4. Recording the aforesaid submissions made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. It is made clear that the petitioner can very well approach the concerned forum and seek redresssal of her grievance in the manner known to law. 13.09.2023 Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No smn2 To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thiruthangal, Virudhuagar District.

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

4/5

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

smn2 Order made in 13.09.2023 5/5