Krishnan v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.09.2022 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Krishnan ... Petitioner/ Accused Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

2.The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Sattur, Virudhunagar District.

3.Sangeetha @ Geetha ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the first respondent to instruct the second respondent not to harass the petitioner on the guise of enquiry in pursuance to the complaint lodged by the third respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Shenbagaraj For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent police not to harass the petitioner on the basis of the complaint given by the third respondent.

1/4

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was in love with the third respondent herein for some time. But the parents of the third respondent arranged marriage with some other boy against her wish. The brother as well as the parents of the petitioner also refused the same. Hence, the third respondent came to the house of the petitioner and conducted Dharna. On that basis, the brother and parents of the petitioner lodged a complaint before the respondent police. Again the present complaint has been given by the third respondent. 3.The grievance of the complainant is that during the course of enquiry in the earlier complaint, she was forced to sign in the statement. The videos and the photographs are also deleted and she was criminally intimidated. Hence, she tried to commit suicide. 4.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that since because the marriage proposal was made between the third respondent with some other boy, the trouble had arisen between the petitioner and the third respondent. The petitioner refused to marry, because of the aforesaid marriage proposal and hence, the third respondent entered into the house of the petitioner and started Dharna. Over which, a complaint has been given.

Enquiry revealed that this petitioner did not take the third respondent to his house and hence, the parties were advised to settle the issue themselves. Thereafter, the present complaint has been given. He further submitted that the petitioner did not appear for enquiry.

5. This Court heard the rival contentions of put forth by the learned counsel appearing on either side.

6. Since the respondent police has stated that the petitioner did not appear for enquiry and since the complaint has been given against the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent police and cooperate for enquiry. If any trouble is arisen during the course of enquiry, the petitioner is at liberty to workout his remedy through appropriate proceedings. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

28.09.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No ta 3/4

G.ILANGOVAN, J., ta To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

2.The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Sattur, Virudhunagar District.

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

28.09.2022 4/4