Rajathi v. The State Of Tamilnadu, Rep. By The Superintendent Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 03.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Rajathi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Superintendent of Police, O/o. Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

2.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

3.Sundarraj ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to take appropriate action against the 3rd respondent by conducting an enquiry based on the petitioner's representation dated 21.11.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Karthigaivel, Advocate For R1 & R2 : Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/5

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to take appropriate action against the 3rd respondent by conducting an enquiry based on the petitioner's representation dated 21.11.2025.

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

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the 3rd respondent is a policeman who was introduced to the petitioner through her late husband and thereafter became a family friend. The 3rd respondent used to receive money from the petitioner for his family needs. In this manner, he received a total sum of Rs.59,00,000/- from the petitioner, out of which he returned only a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- to the petitioner. When the petitioner demanded repayment of the remaining amount, the 3rd respondent began humiliating and threatening her.

4. In this regard, the petitioner had already filed a petition before the 1st respondent on 14.10.2025 seeking action against the 3rd respondent. While the investigation in that matter was ongoing, the 3rd respondent continuously threatened the petitioner over the phone to withdraw the petition. Further, the 2/5

3rd respondent has been harassing the petitioner's daughter, who is studying abroad, by sending private videos to her.

5. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation to the 1st respondent on 21.11.2025. Despite the issuance of a C.S.R., no action has been taken. Hence, the present petition.

6. Heard the learned counsel on either side, and perused the materials available on record.

7. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondent to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, nonconsideration of the representation made by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking the extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

8. Without going into the merits of this case, this Court hereby direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 3/5

21.11.2025 and deal with in accordance with law and conclude the enquiry within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

9. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 03.12.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes mkn To 1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

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

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

4/5

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

mkn 03.12.2025 5/5