Disposed

M.Kalyani v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC21 Oct 2021CRL OP/19275/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Criminal Original Petition under Section 482 CrPC, the petitioner sought protection from further harassment regarding a matrimonial dispute and counter-complaints. The Court remanded the case to the All Women Police Station for enquiry and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

The Court directed the Second Respondent to forward the cases for enquiry to the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Perambalur.

M.Kalyani Vs the Superintendent of Police — Domestic Violence | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 21.10.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.19275 of 2021

¶6

Mrs.M.Kalyani ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1.The Superintendent of Police, Kunnam Taluk, Perambalur District.

¶9

2.The Inspector of Police, Kunnam Police Station, Kunnam Taluk, Perambalur District.

¶10

3.K.Suseela ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner in the guise of enquiry in pursuance to the complaint of the defacto complainant.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Ilamurugu

¶13

For R1 & R2 : Mr.R.Vinoth Raja Government Advocate [Crl. Side]

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

This Criminal Original Petition is filed to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner in the guise of enquiry in pursuance to the complaint of the defacto complainant.

¶16

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's brother was in friendly term with the third respondent via face book, which has been wrongly attributed by the third respondent. The third respondent is forcing the petitioner to make arrangement for the marriage of the petitioner's brother with the third respondent and she also threatened the family of the petitioner with dire consequences and thereby, the petitioner gave a complaint to the second respondent police.

¶17

3.The learned Government Advocate [Crl. Side] submits that there is a complaint and counter complaint given by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner as well as the third respondent against each other.

¶18

The third respondent was in love with the petitioner's brother. On 18.07.2021, the third respondent had appeared before the respondent police and gave a complaint, on the complaint given by the third respondent, the petitioner was called for enquiry and she gave an undertaking that the petitioner's brother Ganesan would come to India and resolve the issue, since it is a personal relationship between the petitioner's brother and the third respondent, on the contrary, the petitioner had lodged a complaint on 27.09.2021.

¶19

4.Considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the materials, it is seen that there is a complaint and counter complaint filed by the petitioner and the third respondent against each other. In view of the same, this Court directs the second respondent to forward the cases to the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Perambalur to enquire the case and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶20

5.With the above observation, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

Assistant Registrar (CS-VI)

¶23

//True Copy//

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

¶27

1.The Superintendent of Police, Kunnam Taluk, Perambalur District.

¶28

2.The Inspector of Police, Kunnam Police Station, Kunnam Taluk, Perambalur District.

¶29

3.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Perambalur.

¶30

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶31

+1cc to Mr.G.Ilamurugu, Advocate, S.R.No.53973

¶32

Crl.O.P.No.19275 of 2021

¶33

SJ(CO)

¶34

GN(15/11/2021)

¶35

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

M.Kalyani v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Kalyani v. the Superintendent of Police

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

K.Murugan Vs the State Rep by

Sethu@Sethubala Vs Deputy Superintendent of Police

G.Job Dev Prasath Vs Assistant Commissioner of Police

Senthil Kumar Vs the Inspector of Police

K.Rajendran Vs the Inspector of Police

Balasubramaniam Vs State Rep.by Its