← Library
Madras High CourtWP Crl.(MD)/2323/2025disposed of

M.Sethulakshmi v. The Superintendent Of Police

2025-12-02Honourable Mrs Justice L.Victoria Gowri6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 02.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI M.Sethulakshmi, W/o.Marimuthu ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi.

2.The Inspector of Police, Central Police Station, Thoothukudi Town.

3.The Proprietor, Velavan Hyper Market, Thoothukudi Town.

4.Muthulakshmi The Sub Inspector of Police, Central Police Station, Thoothukudi ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to secure the CCTV camera footage of Velavan Hyper Market on 11.09.2025 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 28.10.2025. For Petitioner : Ms.M.Sowmiya, Advocate For R1 & R2 : Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/6

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to secure the CCTV camera footage of Velavan Hyper Market on 11.09.2025 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 28.10.2025.

2. This writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage, after dispensing with the notice on the private respondents.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side, and I have perused the materials available on record.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that she was working as an Assistant Accountant in the commercial complex of the third respondent, namely Velavan Hyper Market. She claims to have informed the third respondent about certain malpractices allegedly committed by some employees of the said market, due to which those employees developed vengeance against her. On 11.09.2025, at about 5.35 p.m., the fourth respondent came to the said market, and at that time, the third respondent instructed the fourth respondent to interrogate the petitioner. Without assigning any reason, the fourth respondent allegedly slapped the petitioner on her left cheek, abused her in filthy language, 2/6

and threatened to lodge false cases against her. The fourth respondent is also said to have twisted the petitioner's fingers while demanding the G-Pay password of her mobile phone. Unable to bear the pain, the petitioner disclosed her password. Upon obtaining the same, the fourth respondent allegedly transferred a sum of Rs.37,000/- from the petitioner's account to the account of the third respondent. Further, the petitioner was compelled to execute a document for Rs.3,00,000/-. Thereafter, the fourth respondent allegedly left the place at about 7.35 p.m. after receiving a sum of Rs.50,000/- from the third respondent.

5. When the petitioner lodged a complaint before the higher officials on 19.09.2025 regarding the aforesaid incident, the fourth respondent allegedly instigated the second respondent to register a case against the petitioner, as if she had swindled money from the commercial complex. Consequently, a false FIR is stated to have been registered in Crime No.40 of 2025 on the file of the District Crime Branch Police Station, Thoothukudi, for the alleged offences under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the BNS, 2023. It is the contention of the petitioner that respondent Nos.3 and 4 are attempting to suppress the crime committed by them on 11.09.2025.

3/6

6. In order to secure the CCTV camera footage relating to the incident, the petitioner submitted a representation before the first and second respondents on 28.10.2025. However, no steps have been taken so far to obtain the CCTV footage from the third respondent. Hence, the present petition.

7. Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), on instructions, submitted that the petitioner was involved in misappropriation of amount of Rs.49,38,432/- from Velavan Hyper Market and that, on a complaint made by the third respondent, the Proprietor of Velavan Hyper Market, an FIR in Crime No.40 of 2025 has already been registered by the second respondent police. Only to counter blast the said case, this writ petition has been filed.

8. However, this Court is of the considered view that securing the CCTV footage of Velavan Hyper Market may throw light on the investigation facilitating the second respondent to arrive at appropriate conclusion in the pending investigation.

4/6

9. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to secure the CCTV camera footage of the said Velavan Hyper Market forthwith for the alleged date i.e. 11.09.2025, and provide a copy of the same to the petitioner.

02.12.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes mkn To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi.

2.The Inspector of Police, Central Police Station, Thoothukudi Town.

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

5/6

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

mkn 02.12.2025 6/6