Dismissed

S.Muthusamy v. the Commissioner of Police

Madras HC23 Nov 2021CRL OP/21474/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a Criminal Original Petition seeking police protection from the petitioner's estranged wife. The Court found the apprehension of assault unfounded because the wife was actively evading summons in a pending divorce case, undermining the petitioner's credible fear of her immediate violence. Protection was not granted.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of the Criminal Original Petition seeking police protection as the petitioner's apprehension was found unfounded.

S.Muthusamy Vs the Commissioner of Police — Domestic Violence | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 23.11.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

CRL.O.P.No.21474 of 2021

¶6

S.Muthusamy ...Petitioner

¶7

¶8

The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police, No.132, Commissioner Office Buildings, EVK Sampath Salai,

¶9

Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.

¶10

The Deputy Commissioner of Police,

¶11

St. Thomas Mount Division, Greater Chennai Police,

¶12

Alandur, Chennai – 600 016.

¶13

The Asst. Commissioner of Police, Pallavaram Range,

¶14

Greater Chennai Police, Chennai.

¶15

The Inspector of Police, S-10, Pallikaranai Police Station, Chennai-600 100. ...Respondents

¶16

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondents to provide suitable and necessary police protection to the petitioner based on his abovesaid representation/complaint dated 20.10.2021.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Deliban

¶18

For Respondent : Mr.E.Raj Thilak

¶19

Additional Public Prosecutor

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the respondents to provide suitable and necessary police protection to the petitioner based on his abovesaid representation/complaint dated 20.10.2021.

¶22

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

¶23

2.The petitioner has filed this petition for the reason that he is apprehending the physical assault of his estranged wife Amutha. The petitioner and his wife Amutha have got separated and the petitioner has filed a petition in H.M.O.P No.1391 of 2021, which is pending before the Sub Court Court, Alandur, for divorce.

¶24

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner's brother namely S.Petchimuthu earlier filed H.C.P.No.1503 of 2021 before this Court making allegation that the petitioner was taking treatment in “Trust Way Foundation/deaddiction Centre. At the instance of his estranged wife Amutha, he is being illegally detained. The Division Bench of this Court, on enquiry, found that no such illegal detention has been made and dismissed the H.C.P. He further submits that for the purpose of matrimonial discord, to make grounds of cruelty, such theory is tendered. Now, the complaint has been received by the 4^th respondent on 22.10.2021 and enquiry is pending. If the petitioner has got any material to produce before the respondent police, his complaint along with materials can be produced.

¶25

4.This Court had questioned. The learned counsel for the petitioner admits that H.M.O.P No.1391 of 2021 is pending seeking divorce before the Subordinate Court, Alandur. The H.M.O.P petition was filed and the case was numbered on 08.06.2021 in H.M.O.P.No.1391 of 2021. Thereafter, the case has been periodically adjourned for appearance of his estranged wife namely Amutha on 21.06.2021, 02.08.2021, 03.09.2021 and lastly on 19.11.2021. Till such date , she is evading summons and not appearing. On the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, and on perusal of the materials, it is seen that, the respondent viz., Amutha, the estranged wife of the petitioner is yet to appear before the lower Court.

¶26

5.In view of the same, the petitioner's apprehension seems to be unfounded. Accordingly, the criminal original petition is dismissed.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

Assistant Registrar(CCC)

¶29

//True Copy//

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

ata/sms

¶32

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

¶33

¶34

The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police, No.132, Commissioner Office Buildings, EVK Sampath Salai, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007. 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, St. Thomas Mount Division, Greater Chennai Police, Alandur, Chennai – 600 016. 3. The Asst. Commissioner of Police, Pallavaram Range, Greater Chennai Police, Chennai. 4. The Inspector of Police, S-10, Pallikaranai Police Station, Chennai-600 100. 5. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

¶35

CRL.O.P.No.21474 of 2021

¶36

BS[co] NSK 08/12/2021

¶37

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

S.Muthusamy v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Muthusamy v. the Commissioner 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

Subhan Saheb Vs the State of Tamil Nadu Repby

R.Adhisaya Deisi Sheela Vs State Rep by

Ganesan Vs the State

S.Sripriya Vs State Rep by

S.Pandian Vs The Inspector of Police

M.Meera Vs the Superintendent of Police