Disposed

Lalitha v. The Superintendent of police

Madras HC29 Mar 2021WP/7985/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction under Article 226 CPI to restrain the respondents from harassing her and her family in a money dispute. The Court held that money disputes between family members are for civil courts and police have no role.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the respondent police not to interfere in the money dispute between the parties.

Lalitha Vs The Superintendent of police — Money Laundering | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 29.03.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

W.P.No.7985 of 2021

Mrs.Lalitha,

...Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The Superintendent of Police, Thiruvallur District.

¶10

2.The State by Inspector of Police, T2, Ambatur Police Station, Ambatur, Chennai District. ...Respondents

¶11

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2^nd respondent herein not to harass the petitioner herein and her husband's family members in any manner except by due process of law on the basis of representation dated 20.03.2021, given by the petitioner herein.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Ramar

¶13

For Respondents: Mr.C.Raghavan, Government Advocate for RR1 & 2. ORDER

¶14

This writ petition has been filed for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent not to harass the petitioner and her husband's family members in any manner except by due process of law.

¶15

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶16

Taking into consideration the fact that the nature of the dispute involved in this case is a money dispute between the family members, it is for the parties to redress the same before the appropriate Civil Court and the respondent police will have no role to play in a case of this nature.

¶17

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

¶18

This Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent police not to interfere in the money dispute between the parties and it is open for the parties to agitate their rights before the competent civil court.

¶19

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS IX)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rm
To
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Thiruvallur District.
2.The Inspector of Police,
T2, Ambatur Police Station,
Ambatur, Chennai District.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court,
Chennai-108.
W.P.No.7985 of 2021
JPL(CO)
RMP(30/04/2021)

¶20

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

Lalitha v. The Superintendent of police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalitha 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

V.Seema Vs State by

Rani Vs The Director of Prosecution (i/c)

R.H.Annadurai Vs State Rep.by

Jaya Mohan Vs State Rep.by

B.Kavitha Vs The Superintendent of Police

Vadivel Vs Jaganatharao