Parthirakali .M v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.12.2023 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN W.P(MD) No.23252 of 2023 M.Parthirakali ... Petitioner Vs.

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

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kamuthi Circle, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Perunali Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner and her son Sappani @ Murugesan, S/o. Muniyasamy by considering her representation dated 02.09.2023 within a stipulated time as may be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner :Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian For Respondents :Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.side) ` 1/4

O R D E R

This Writ Petition is filed in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner and her son Sappani @ Murugesan, S/o. Muniyasamy by considering her representation dated 02.09.2023 within a stipulated time as may be fixed by this Court.

2. The reason for this petitioner to file the petition on behalf of his son, is not entertainable. If the petitioner's son has any grievance, he ought to have approached this Court by filing this petition. Now he is also not available.

3. Learned Government Advocate submitted that absolutely no written order was passed by the second respondent herein. But however, the petitioner's son is having previous cases, among which some of the cases are registered for the offences under Section 302 of IPC. There was also no oral direction given by the second respondent in this regard.

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that as per the bail condition imposed upon the petitioner's son in Cr.M.P.No.222 of 2022 by the 2/4

learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District, he was directed to stay within the jurisdiction of either Paramakudi or around Ramanathapuram. According to the petitioner, if any restrain is made on the petitioner's son, to enter into the village, then it will amount to violation of condition.

5. But the learned Government Advocate would submit that the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Paramakudi, is not a party here. The second respondent having jurisdiction only within the Kamuthi circle. It does not come under Paramakudi area. So far as the third respondent is concerned, he is having jurisdiction.

6. Whatever it may be. since it is stated that no written order is passed by the second respondent or the competent authority, as per the case may be, the matter has become unnecessary. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

08.12.2023 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No pnn 3/4

G.ILANGOVAN, J pnn To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kamuthi Circle, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Perunali Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

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

Order made in Dated 08.12.2023 4/4