Madras High CourtCONT P(MD)/1429/2022closed

Muthumari, v. Madurai Veeran

2022-12-02Honourable Mr Justice Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.12.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP in Crl.O.P(MD) No.13353 of 2022 Muthumarai .. Petitioner Vs.

Madurai Veeran The Inspector of Police Koodalpudur Police Station, Madurai District .. Contemnor Prayer : This petition is filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Court Act to punish the Contemnor/ Respondent for willful disobedience in non implementation of this Hon'ble Court order in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.13353/2022 dated 25-07-2022 that not initiate any action on my complaint dated 22-07-2022 neither recover my snatched smart-phone nor registered the case against the accused persons and thereby committed contempt of court For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sheik Hussain For Respondent : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This Contempt petition has been filed to punish the Contemnor/ Respondent for willful disobedience in non implementation of this Hon'ble Court order in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.13353/2022 dated 25-07-2022 that not to initiate any 1/4

action on the complaint dated 22-07-2022 neither recover the snatched smartphone nor registered the case against the accused persons and thereby committed contempt of Court.

2. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the then learned Single Judge of this Court after hearing the then learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) in Crl.O.P(MD) No.13353 of 2022 dated 25.07.2022 had directed the fourth Respondent in Crl.O.P(MD) No.13353 of 2022 to conduct enquiry upon the complaint given by the Petitioner and to provide police protection for constructing house works of the Petitioner. It is the further submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the fourth Respondent had not conducted enquiry or granted police protection. The Respondents 5 to 22 in the Criminal Original Petition had caused threat to her and threatened her to withdraw the complaint which she had given earlier.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor objected to the line of arguments of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner stating that there had been counter case in this case. Also in the light of the direction issued by the then learned Single Judge of this Court in Crl.O.P(MD) No.13353 of 2022 the police had given protection to the Petitioner and he had produced the book containing signature of the police officials of Koodalpudur Police Station as patta book regarding the book which is maintained with the house owners which had been 2/4

furnished as proof for the same. The fourth Respondent has not extended protection as per the order. If it had been so, there would not be subsequent incident. Therefore the Respondents 1 to 4 are directed to take appropriate action against the private Respondents 5 to 22.

4. With the above direction, the Contempt Petition is closed. The mobile phone alleged to have seized by the Respondents 5 to 22 is directed to be recovered by the fourth Respondent and handed over to the Petitioner. 02.12.2022 Internet : Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order aav To Madurai Veeran The Inspector of Police Koodalpudur Police Station, Madurai District 3/4

SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP , J.

aav 02.12.2022 4/4