Madras High Court
Murugesan vs The Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2014
Author: N.Kirubakaran
Bench: N.Kirubakaran
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.07.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN Crl.O.P(MD)No.13592 of 2014 1.Murugesan 2.Ranjitha ... Petitioners Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District. 2.Inspector of Police, S-11, Police Station, Thambaram, Chennai District. 3.Inspector of Police, Alangudi Police Station, Pudukkottai District. ... Respondents Prayer Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioners on the representation dated 09.07.2014 and 10.07.2014. !For Petitioner : Mr.V.Selva For Respondent : Mr.P.Kandasamy Govt.Advocate(Crl.Side) :ORDER
The newly wedded couple has come before this Court seeking a direction to the respondents not to harass the petitioners considering the representations dated 09.07.2014 and 10.07.2014.
2. The contention of the petitioners is that the first petitioner and the second petitioner loved each other and they wanted to get married. Hence, the parents of the second petitioner opposed. In view of that, the second petitioner came out with the first petitioner and got married the first petitioner on 01.07.2014. However, based on the complaint given by the second petitioner's father, the respondent police are harassing the petitioners, which compelled the petitioners to approach this Court.
3. Heard Mr.V.Selva learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr.P.Kandasamy, learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the State.
4. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court, petitioners are present and this Court enquired as to why came out and got married. They explained their position. The statement of the petitioners are taken note.
5. A perusal of the Transfer Certificates issued in respect of both the petitioners would show that the first petitioner is aged about 31 years and the second petitioner is aged about 22 years and both of them are major, having been born on 31.07.1983 and on 14.05.1992 respectively. The marriage certificate dated 01.07.2014 would also reveal that the marriage was solemnized on 01.07.2014 and it was registered. When both the petitioners are major, absolutely there is no prohibition under law to get married.
6. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) would also submitted that based on the complaint given by the second petitioner's father, namely, Mr.Sivashanmugam, No.6/30, Pajanaikovil Street, Thiruneermalai Road, Kadaperi, West Tambaram, Chennai, an enquiry was conducted and based on which, the second petitioner's father requested the police to close the complaint and based on which, the complaint was closed.
7. When the petitioners are major and they already got married as evident from the records and the complaint given by the second petitioner's father was also closed on 09.07.2014, the respondent police cannot harass the petitioners.
8. In view of that there will be a direction to the respondents not to harass the petitioners. In case if there is any difficulty for the petitioners and there is likelihood of danger, it is appropriate to the respondent police to give police protection in case of necessity.
9. This Criminal Original Petition is ordered accordingly. To
1.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District.
2.Inspector of Police, S-11, Police Station, Thambaram, Chennai District.
3.Inspector of Police, Alangudi Police Station, Pudukkottai District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.