Dismissed

S.Abdulla, v. the Deputy Superintendent

Madras HC14 Mar 2017WP(MD)/25067/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus to restrain the police from interfering in civil disputes. The court held that pending criminal cases between the parties made the grant of relief inappropriate and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Relief claimed in the writ petition was refused as criminal cases were pending against the parties.

S.Abdulla, Vs the Deputy Superintendent — Dowry and Cruelty | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 14.03.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.25067 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD)No.18142 of 2016

S.Abdulla

: Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Melur, Madurai District.

¶11

2.The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Melur, Madurai District.

¶12

3.Seenipithai : Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the second respondent from interfering the civil rights in between the petitioner and the third respondent.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Saravanakumar

¶15

For Respondents 1&2 : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen,

¶16

Additional Government Pleader For Respondent No.3 : Mr.S.A.Ajmalkhan

¶17

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that on the complaint lodged by one Seenipitchai, the second respondent police has registered a case in Crime No.94 of 2017 under Sections 147, 148, 452, 294(b), 427, 323, 324 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code against this petitioner and six others. Similarly, a counter case has been registered on the complaint of one Saitthan Beevi in Crime No.95 of 2017 under Sections 147, 427, 294(b), 336 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code against Seenipitchai and six others.

¶20

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

¶21

¶22

In view of the fact that there are criminal cases registered against the petitioner and the opposite parties, the relief as claimed by the petitioner cannot be granted.

¶23

In the result, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶24

Sd/Assistant Registrar(P&A) /True Copy/

¶25

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶26

¶27

1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Melur, Madurai District.

¶28

2.The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Melur, Madurai District.

¶29

+1 CC TO M/S.S.SARAVANAKUMAR,ADVOCATE,SR NO.14632

¶30

+1 CC TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SR NO.14721

¶31

SML

¶32

MAS/RR:28.03.2017:2P-5C

¶33

Order made in W.P.(MD)No.25067 of 2016 Dated: 14.03.2017

¶34

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

S.Abdulla, v. the Deputy Superintendent

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Abdulla, v. the Deputy Superintendent

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nijamuhaideen Vs the Inspector of Police

Usmin Vs Mohamed Younus

M.S. Mohammed Younes Vs Usmin

C.Subbaiyan, Vs Mr.Sivaraj

Rajesh Kumar, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Muthuraman Vs the Superintendent of Police