Madras High Court
Geetha vs State Of Tamilnadu on 19 August, 2025
Author: B.Pugalendhi
Bench: B.Pugalendhi
Crl.OP(MD)No.8253 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 19.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
Crl.OP(MD)No.8253 of 2025
Geetha : Petitioner
Vs.
1.State of Tamilnadu,
Rep. by the Commissioner of Police,
Madurai,
Madurai.
2.State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by the Inspector of Police,
Thallakulam Police Station,
Madurai.
3.State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by the Inspector of Police,
Mayiladuthurai Police Station,
Mayiladuthurai. : Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 528 BNSS [482 CrPC] directing the
respondents 1 & 2 not to harass the petitioner and her family members in
the name of enquiry without due process of law.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/08/2025 12:33:09 pm )
Crl.OP(MD)No.8253 of 2025
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Joseph Jerry
For Respondents : Mr.P.Kottaichamy,
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
*****
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this petition with a grievance that the respondents Police are harassing her and her family.
2.According to the petitioner, the respondents Police are harassing them to admit their involvement in the kidnapping of one Sundaram and insisting them to give confession.
3.Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), on instructions, submitted that the petitioner is an accused in Crime No.446 of 2025 on the file of the D1 Tallakulam Police Station, registered for the offence u/s. 305(a), 140(2), 111(3), 61(2), 49, 127(2), 351(2), 142 BNS. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/08/2025 12:33:09 pm ) Crl.OP(MD)No.8253 of 2025
4.Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been added as an accused, since she has filed this petition as against the respondents Police.
5.Considering the allegations levelled by the petitioner, this Court directed the respondents to file their counter affidavit.
6.Accordingly, the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Tallakulam Range, Madurai City, has filed a counter affidavit stating that the case relates to the kidnapping of one Karumuthu T. Sundaram on 06.04.2025 with the object of forcibly grabbing his property. The victim was recovered on 18.04.2025. A special investigation team was formed, and upon analysis of CCTV footage and cell tower data, it was found that the accused persons used a Bolero vehicle with a fake registration number to carry out the offence.
7.The counter affidavit further discloses that on 13.04.2025, A3 – Vijayan was present at the petitioner’s residence, and on the following day, the petitioner was found not at home. As per the inclusion report dated 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/08/2025 12:33:09 pm ) Crl.OP(MD)No.8253 of 2025 21.05.2025, she was added as A-23 based on the materials collected so far and on the confession of A-15 – Vignesh @ Vellai Vikki. The investigation also revealed, through IPDR (Internet Protocol Detailed Records), that A3 – Vijayan had been regularly using the petitioner’s mobile phone to make WhatsApp calls to other accused persons and, on at least one occasion, used her Wi-Fi hotspot to issue instructions to them. The respondent police assert that these facts indicate her knowledge of and facilitation in the offence. It is further stated that the investigation has been concluded and final report has also been filed before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.2, Madurai and insofar as the petitioner is concerned, absconding charge sheet has been filed.
8.This Court paid it's anxious consideration to the rival submissions made on either side and perused the materials placed on record.
9.The petitioner asserts that she has no role in the alleged offence and that the police are unnecessarily targeting her. The respondent police, on the other hand, maintain that her involvement is verified by tangible 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/08/2025 12:33:09 pm ) Crl.OP(MD)No.8253 of 2025 electronic evidence and other investigative material.
10.Be that as it may, in any event, since a case has been registered, investigated, and the final report has been filed before the Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Madurai, it is for the petitioner to establish her defence before the trial Court in accordance with law and this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same.
Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed.
Internet : Yes 19.08.2025
gk
To
1.The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Thallakulam Police Station,
Madurai.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Mayiladuthurai Police Station,
Mayiladuthurai.
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/08/2025 12:33:09 pm )
Crl.OP(MD)No.8253 of 2025
gk
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
Crl.OP(MD)No.8253 of 2025
19.08.2025
6/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/08/2025 12:33:09 pm )