Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

R.Sakunthala Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Madras HC
2025
R.Sakunthala Vs The State of TamilnaduR.Sakunthala v. The State of Tamilnadu

Dismissed¶31

R.Sakunthala v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC19 Dec 2025CRL OP(MD)/23606/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Section 528 BNSS, 2023; direction not to harass; police enquiry/harassment allegation; repeated false complaints; pending POCSO sessions case S.C.No.250 of 2025 / Crime No.8 of 2025, POCSO Court, Madurai; respondents 3 to 6 (P.Nanteeshkumar, N.Nisha, N.Nabinesh, N.Nimitha) alleged threats; Commissioner of Police, Madurai City; Inspector of Police, Thilagar Thidal All Women Police Station, South; notice to private respondents dispensed with (limited scope of relief); petitioner's apprehensions held baseless; Criminal Original Petition dismissed; no protective direction granted; single-judge order by L. Victoria Gowri, J., dated 19.12.2025; counsel: Mr.MU.Sharavanan for petitioner, Mr.S.Ravi, Additional Public Prosecutor, for respondents; Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23606 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Finding the petitioner's apprehensions baseless, the court held there was no necessity to direct respondents 1 and 2 not to harass the petitioner; accordingly the Criminal Original Petition was dismissed.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 1 and 2 (the Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, and the Inspector of Police, Thilagar Thidal All Women Police Station, South) should be directed not to harass the petitioner and his son in the name of enquiry on the basis of repeated false complaints given by the respondents 3 to 6.

Ratio / Principle

Finding the petitioner's apprehensions baseless, the court held there was no necessity to direct respondents 1 and 2 not to harass the petitioner; accordingly the Criminal Original Petition was dismissed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23606 of 2025, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, decided 19.12.2025 by L. Victoria Gowri, J.: Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 by R.Sakunthala seeking a direction to respondents 1 and 2 (the Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, and the Inspector of Police, Thilagar Thidal All Women Police Station, South, Madurai City) not to harass the petitioner and his son in the name of enquiry on the basis of repeated false complaints given by respondents 3 to 6 (P.Nanteeshkumar, N.Nisha, N.Nabinesh, N.Nimitha), who were alleged to have threatened and complained against the petitioner and her family members during the pendency of S.C.No.250 of 2025 on the file of the learned POCSO Court, Madurai, arising out of Crime No.8 of 2025. Considering the limited scope of the relief sought, notice to respondents 3 to 6 was dispensed with. Finding the petitioner's apprehensions baseless, the court held there was no necessity to direct the respondents 1 and 2 not to harass the petitioner, and the Criminal Original Petition was dismissed. No protective direction was granted.

A

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23606 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 19.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23606 of 2025

R.Sakunthala ... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its, The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai-625 007.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thilagar Thidal All Women Police Station, South, Madurai City, Madurai.

3.P.Nanteeshkumar

4.N.Nisha

5.N.Nabinesh

6.N.Nimitha ... Respondents

PRAYER : Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 not to harass the petitioner and his son in the name of enquiry on the basis of repeated false complaints given by the respondents 3 to 6.

1/5

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

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23606 of 2025

For Petitioner : Mr.MU.Sharavanan For Respondent : Mr.S.Ravi, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

Seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 not to harass the petitioner and his son in the name of enquiry on the basis of repeated false complaints given by the respondents 3 to 6, this petition is filed.

Considering the limited scope of the relief sought for, notice to the respondents 3 to 6 is dispensed with.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and her family members are arrayed as accused in S.C.No.250 of 2025 on the file of the learned POCSO Court, Madurai, arising out of Crime No.8 of 2025. During the pendency of the said criminal proceedings in S.C.No. 250 of 2025, the respondents 3 to 6 are continuously threatening the petitioner and her family members. Based on the repeated false complaints lodged by the respondents 3 to 6, the respondents 1 and 2 are continuously harassing the petitioner and her family members under the guise of enquiry.

2/5

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

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23606 of 2025

4.Heard the learned counsels on either side and carefully perused the

materials available on record.

5.Finding htat the petitioner's apprehensions are baseless, I do not find

any necessity to direct the respondents 1 and 2 not to harass the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed .

19.12.2025

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No

vsg

3/5

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

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23606 of 2025

TO :-

The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai-625 007.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thilagar Thidal All Women Police Station, South, Madurai City, Madurai.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

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

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23606 of 2025

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

vsg

Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23606 of 2025

Dated 19.12.2025

5/5

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

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether respondents 1 and 2 (the Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, and the Inspector of Police, Thilagar Thidal All Women Police Station, South) should be directed not to harass the petitioner and his son in the name of enquiry on the basis of repeated false complaints given by the respondents 3 to 6.¶21

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

BNSS, 2023Section 528¶15

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Petitioner and her family members are arrayed as accused in S.C.No.250 of 2025 on the file of the learned POCSO Court, Madurai, arising out of Crime No.8 of 2025 (as submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner).¶23
Prior proceeding
During the pendency of the said criminal proceedings, respondents 3 to 6 are alleged to be continuously threatening the petitioner and her family members.¶23
Prior proceeding
On the basis of repeated complaints allegedly lodged by respondents 3 to 6, respondents 1 and 2 are alleged to be continuously harassing the petitioner and her family members under the guise of enquiry.¶23

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
R.Sakunthala¶7
Mr.MU.Sharavanan
respondent
The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its, The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai-625 007.¶9
Mr.S.Ravi
respondent
The Inspector of Police, Thilagar Thidal All Women Police Station, South, Madurai City, Madurai.¶10
Mr.S.Ravi
respondent
P.Nanteeshkumar¶11
Mr.S.Ravi
respondent
N.Nisha¶12
Mr.S.Ravi
respondent
N.Nabinesh¶13
Mr.S.Ravi
respondent
N.Nimitha¶14
Mr.S.Ravi

Coram

AI extract

L.VICTORIA GOWRIauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 19 Dec 2025 · December
Registered: 17 Dec 2025
Case no.: CRL OP(MD)/23606/2025
CNR: HCMD011944192025
Bench: L.victoria Gowri
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: Crl.O.P.(MD)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from L.victoria Gowri

Aseese Vs The State of Tamil Nadu
18 Dec 2025
Thamilarasi Vs The State of Tamil Nadu
18 Dec 2025
Rethinam @ Rethinakumar Vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police
18 Dec 2025
Gomathi Vs The State of Tamilnadu
19 Dec 2025
V.E.Siva Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep.by
19 Dec 2025
Raja Vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police
19 Dec 2025

Cite this judgement

R.Sakunthala v. The State of Tamilnadu, CRL OP(MD)/23606/2025 (MAD), decided on 19 December 2025.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

BNSS, 2023Section 528

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Petitioner and her family members are arrayed as accused in S.C.No.250 of 2025 on the file of the learned POCSO Court, Madurai, arising out of Crime No.8 of 2025 (as submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner).
During the pendency of the said criminal proceedings, respondents 3 to 6 are alleged to be continuously threatening the petitioner and her family members.

View full history

Bench / Coram

L.VICTORIA GOWRI

Parties & counsel