← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/16628/2024disposed of

S.P.Subash v. The State Of Tamilnadu,

2024-10-01Honourable Mr Justice K.Murali Shankar6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.10.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR S.P.Subash ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, 2.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

3.The Inspector of Police, S.S.Colony Police Station, Madurai City.

4.The Inspector of Police, Taluk Police Station, Dindigul, 5.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Sanarpatti, 6.K.Abirami 1/6

7.Maheswari 8.Periyasami 9.Sathya ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to direct the third respondent to provide police protection to life and limb of the petitioner and his family members from the respondents 6 to 9 and their henchmen.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Murugappan For R1 to R5 : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R6 to R9 : Mr.P.T.Rameshraja

ORDER

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 528 B.N.S.S., seeking orders to direct the third respondent to provide police protection to life and limb of the petitioner and his family members from the respondents 6 to 9 and their henchmen.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner went with the sixth respondent to attend the family 2/6

function of the sixth respondent, where the private respondents had compelled the petitioner to marry the sixth respondent.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 6 to 9 would submit that the petitioner is aged 25 years, that the sixth respondent already got married and separated and her first husband had married another girl and living separately, that the petitioner after knowing the same had married the sixth respondent on 16.09.2024, that the petitioner's father had not consented for the marriage and hence, the petitioner himself has given a complaint as if he was compelled to marry the sixth respondent and that enquiry is pending before the concerned police.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 5 would submit that on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner as well as the sixth respondent, two CSRs came to be registered and both are pending for enquiry.

5. Considering the above, the fifth respondent is directed to issue 3/6

written summons to the petitioner as well as to the respondents 6 to 9 and conduct enquiry and take a decision with a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.

01.10.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No csm To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, 2.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

3.The Inspector of Police, S.S.Colony Police Station, Madurai City.

4.The Inspector of Police, Taluk Police Station, Dindigul, 4/6

5.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Sanarpatti, 6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, 5/6

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.

csm Order made in Dated: 01.10.2024 6/6