Dismissed

C.Thangam, W/O.Chinnasamy v. the Principal Secretary to

Madras HC21 Mar 2017WP(MD)/23789/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mother of a 27-year-old man filed a writ petition seeking registration of a complaint regarding her son's alleged forced marriage and subsequent annulment suit. The Court dismissed the petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue the matter before the appropriate forum.

What did the court decide?

Relief dismissed; liberty granted to petitioner to work out remedy before the appropriate forum.

C.Thangam, W/O.Chinnasamy Vs the Principal Secretary to — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 21.03.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.23789 of 2016

¶7

C.Thangam ... Petitioner

¶8

-vs-

¶9

1.	THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HEAD QUARTERS, CHENNAI.
2.	THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, DR.RADHAKRISHNAN SALAI, MYLAPORE, OPP. QUEEN MARYS COLLEGE, CHENNAI.
3.	THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, CENTRAL ZONE, SUBRAMANIAPURAM, TOLL GATE, TRICHY.
4.	THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, SUBRAMANIAPURAM, PUDUKOTTAI ROAD, TRICHY.
5.	THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MANAPPARAI POLICE STATION, TRICHIRAPPALLI DISTRICT. ... Respondents
Pray	er:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of resp Offi FIR file dire	India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the ondents Nos.1 to 4 to appoint a competent Station House cer to register petitioner's complaint dated 28.11.2016 as an and further direct him to investigate into the matter and to the final report within the stipulated period under the ct monitoring as prescribed by this Honble Court.
	For Petitioner : Mr.M.Pitchai Muthu
cservices	For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, Addl. Govt. Pleader ********* .ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶11

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to appoint a competent Station House Officer to register the petitioner's complaint dated 28.11.2016 with further direction to investigate into the matter and to file a final report.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the State.

¶15

It is the case of the petitioner that she has a son by name Manikanda Sankar and that he was supposed to get married to one Keerthika on 05.09.2016 at Selvalakshmi Marriage Hall. While the marriage ceremony was in progress, Police intervened and took away her son for enquiry, on the complaint given by one Jeenath. It is the contention of the petitioner that the Police prevented the marriage of her son with Keerthika and they forcibly got him married to Jeenath. Hence, she has filed the present writ petition with the above prayer.

¶16

On notice, the 5th respondent has filed a counter, wherein in Paragraph Nos.6 & 7, it is stated as follows:

¶17

"6. It is respectfully submitted that on 05.09.2016, one Jeenath, D/o.Shajakhan had appeared before the All Women Police Station, Manapparai and lodged a written complaint dated 05.09.2016 stating that the petitioner's son namely Manikanda Sankar and herself had fallen in love and they have loved each other sincerely for the past 6 years. It is further stated in the complaint that the petitioner's son namely Manikanda Sankar had made false promise to marry her and he also had sexual intercourse with her. Apart from that the said Jeenath has brought to the notice that she has been subjected to miscarriage by the petitioner's son namely Manikanda Sankar. Since the averments made in the complaint discloses serious nature, the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Manapparai had received the complaint from the said Jeenath and issued a C.S.R.Receipt No.220/2016 dated 05.09.2016.

¶18

It is respectfully submitted that on the basis of the complaint dated 05.09.2016 given by the Jeenath, the said C.Manikanda Sankar, S/o.Chinnasamy was enquired. During the investigation, the said Manikanda Sankar had revealed that he has been forced by his parents to marry one Kirthika on 05.09.2016 against his wishes. The https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner's son also admitted that he has fallen love with the said Jeenath and he is loving her for the past 5

¶19

¶20

years and agreed to marry her by following Hindu Rites and Customs. The said statement was given by the petitioner's son on his own volition in presence of two witnesses, namely S.Kumar and P.Durairaju."

¶21

On the direction of this Court, Manikanda Sankar is present

¶22

and is represented by Mr.Balaji, Advocate. The fact remains that Manikanda Sankar is 27 year old and that he has filed SMOP No.4 of 2017 before the learned Principal District Judge, Trichy for annulling the alleged marriage with Jeenath that is said to have been held on 05.09.2016. This writ petition has been filed on 05.09.2016 by the mother of the said Manikanda Sankar. This Court does not want to say anything more, as that would cause prejudice to the pending litigations. Suffice to say that when Manikanda Sankar is able to take care of his issues with Jeenath, it may not be necessary for Thangam to carry his cross.

¶23

In the result, this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out her remedy before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law. No costs.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶26

/True Copy/

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

To:

¶29

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HEAD QUARTERS, CHENNAI.

¶30

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, DR.RADHAKRISHNAN SALAI, MYLAPORE, OPP. QUEEN MARYS COLLEGE, CHENNAI.

¶31

THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, CENTRAL ZONE, SUBRAMANIAPURAM, TOLL GATE, TRICHY.

¶32

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE,

¶33

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ SUBRAMANIAPURAM, PUDUKOTTAI ROAD, TRICHY.

¶34

¶35

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MANAPPARAI POLICE STATION, TRICHIRAPPALLI DISTRICT.

¶36

+1cc to Spl.Government Pleader Sr.No. 16650

¶37

¶38

VB/KP/SAR4/11.04.2017/4P/7C

¶39

W.P.(MD) No.23789 of 2016 21.03.2017

¶40

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

C.Thangam, W/O.Chinnasamy v. the Principal Secretary to

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Thangam, W/O.Chinnasamy v. the Principal Secretary to

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manavalan Angelo Jude Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Jeyapandi, Vs State Rep.through

Thilaga, Vs the Inspector of Police

K.Vasuki, Vs M.Krishnan

Nallasamy Vs Jegadheesan

Sudalaimani Vs the Superintendent of Police