Madras High Court
P.Saranya vs The Director General Of Police on 26 June, 2019
Author: V.Bharathidasan
Bench: V.Bharathidasan
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 26.06.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8897 of 2019
1.P.Saranya
2.Praveen ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.The Director General of Police,
Chennai.
2.The Superintendent of Police,
Thanjavur District,
Thanjavur.
3.Jeya Gowri
4.Rekkaarani
5.Keerithivasan
6.Sivasankar
7.Shanmugam
8.Jambu
9.Selvakumar ...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to
direct the first and second respondent to provide necessary police
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
protection to the petitioners life and limb by considering her representation
dated 26.03.2019 within the period that may be stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Jerin Mathew
For R1 and R2 : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondent police to give police protection to the petitioner's life and limb by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 26.03.2019.
2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the first petitioner is a practicing Advocate, she married the second petitioner, who belongs to different community. Due to the same, the fourth respondent / Inspector of Police has registered various false complaints against the second petitioner / husband of the first petitioner. It is also stated that the fourth respondent is harassing the first petitioner and disturbing her peaceful practicing as Advocate. Hence, the first petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents 1 and 2 seeking police protection. The http://www.judis.nic.in 3 same is still pending for consideration. Hence, the petitioners have filed the present petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that only in order to take revenge for inter-caste marriage between the petitioners, the respondents 3 to 6 foisting false cases against the second petitioner are harassing them.
4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, would submit that the second petitioner, who is the husband of the first petitioner, is a history sheeted rowdy and nine criminal cases are pending against him in various Police stations in Kumbakonam Taluk, which reads thus:-
1 Station Crime Sections Stage 1 Natchiyarkovil Police 249/ 2017 147, 148, 341, 324, C.A-31.03.2 Station 294(b), 323 nd 307 IPC 015 2 Natchiyarkovil Police 220/ 2012 294 (b) and 323 IPC FIR closed Station 167(5) Cr.P.C., 24.11.2014 3 Natchiyarkovil Police 303/ 2014 151 Cr.P.C., r/w 7(1)(a) Acquittal Station CLA Act 07.03.2019 4 Natchiyarkovil Police 305/ 2010 110 Cr.P.C. Found Station (Conviction) http://www.judis.nic.in 4 5 Natchiyarkovil Police 147/ 2017 147, 148, 294(b), 323, NTF Station 324 and 506(ii) IPC 6 Natchiyarkovil Police 247/ 2017 341, 386 and 506 (ii) PT CC.282 Station IPC of 2018 7 Natchiyarkovil Police 271/ 2018 386 and 506(ii) IPC PT CC.318 Station of 2018 8 Natchiyarkovil Police 44/ 2019 399 IPC PT CC.172 Station of 2019 9 Pattiswaran Police 186/ 2017 386 and 506(ii) IPC UI Station
5. He further submitted that earlier the first petitioner has given a similar complaint before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruvidaimaruthur, Thanjavur District and the same was enquired into and closed holding that there is no proof for the allegations made by the petitioners.
6. Considering the fact that the second petitioner is a history sheeted rowdy and as many as nine criminal cases are pending against him and the respondent police is also investigating all those cases, at this stage, the prayer as such sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted. That apart, already, the petitioner's complaint has already been thoroughly http://www.judis.nic.in 5 investigated by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruvidaimaruthur and closed as the allegations made by the petitioners are not correct.
7. In the above circumstances, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
26.06.2019 Index :Yes/No Internet:Yes/No ta To
1.The Director General of Police, Chennai.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in 6 V.BHARATHIDASAN,J ta Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8897 of 2019 26.06.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in