Dismissed

M.S.Mohammed Mustafa v. State Rep by

Madras HC5 Oct 2023CRL OP/22608/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner husband challenged C.R. closing of a complaint against him for harassment. The respondent police closed the C.S.R. due to a pendency suit for conjugal rights filed by his wife. Finding no ground to apprehend future harassment after the C.S.R. closure, the Court dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition is disposed of as there is no ground to apprehend police harassment after the closure of the C.S.R.

M.S.Mohammed Mustafa Vs State Rep by — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P..No.22608 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 05.10.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.22608 of 2023

¶7

M.S.Mohammed Mustafa ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Inspector of Police, W9, All Women P.S, Villivakkam, Chennai. ... Respondent

¶10

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, direction for not to harass and refraining the respondent from such harassment.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.F.Najimudeen For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The petitioner is the husband of one Bismi Nihara has filed a

¶14

complaint to the respondent police alleging harassment against her husband

¶15

Mohammed Mustafa, who is the petitioner herein. The police has registered

¶16

1/4

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

Crl.O.P..No.22608 of 2023

¶19

the complaint in C.S.R.No.467 of 2023 and after enquiring the parties, have closed the C.S.R advising them to workout the remedy before the competent Court.

¶20

2. From the petition, this Court finds that the complainant has already

¶21

instituted suit for conjugal rights and the same is pending in O.S.No.20 of 2022 on the file of the Family Court, Chennai.

¶22

3. In the light of the above fact, the police has closed the C.S.R.No.467 of 2023 on 01.09.2023. Therefore, there is no ground to apprehend that the police will harass the petitioner after closure of the C.S.R. Recording the same, the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

¶23

05.10.2023

¶24

Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No

¶25

mac/rpl

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

2/4

¶28

Crl.O.P..No.22608 of 2023

¶29

¶30

1.Inspector of Police, W9, All Women P.S, Villivakkam, Chennai.

¶31

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶32

3/4

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

Crl.O.P..No.22608 of 2023

¶35

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

¶36

Mac/rpl

¶37

Crl.O.P.No.22608 of 2023

¶38

05.10.2023

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

4/4

M.S.Mohammed Mustafa v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.S.Mohammed Mustafa v. State Rep by

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

S.Alex Pandian Vs State Rep.by

M/S.Milltex Engineers Private Limited Vs M.Thangaraj

Krishna Kumar Desai Vs Inspector of Police

K.Harikrishnan Vs the State Rep by Its

Mohamed Uzama Vs the Commissioner of Police

Shantilal Betala Vs M/S.Paceman Finance India (P) Limited