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.

Ambika Vs The Superintendent of Police — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Home
Madras HC
2026
Ambika Vs The Superintendent of PoliceAmbika v. The Superintendent of Police

Disposed¶34

Ambika v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC3 Feb 2026CRL OP(MD)/1983/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anti-harassment criminal original petition under Section 528 BNSS 2023 before Madurai Bench of Madras High Court (CRL OP(MD) No.1983 of 2026, decided 03/02/2026, L. Victoria Gowri J.). Petitioners Ambika, Mani, Sowmiya and Sabari sought protection from enquiry/harassment by Thuraiyur Police (Thiruchirappalli) on complaints by Saranya and Suganya alleging receipt of money on pretext of arranging jobs; five complaints reported; petition disposed with direction to petitioners to co-operate with police enquiry and investigation. Keywords: police harassment petition, job racket allegation, enquiry pending, Thuraiyur, Thiruchirappalli, BNSS S.528, disposed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to co-operate with the enquiry and ongoing investigation by the third respondent police; the protective direction against harassment sought in the petition was not granted.

Why is it important?

In view of the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of directing the petitioners to co-operate with the enquiry and ongoing investigation undertaken by the third respondent police; no direction restraining the police from alleged harassment was issued. ¶34

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioners directed to co-operate with the enquiry and ongoing investigation by the third respondent police; the protective direction against harassment sought in the petition was not granted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the third respondent police is harassing the petitioners in the guise of enquiry on the complaint of the fourth and fifth respondents, and whether the Court should direct that such harassment cease.

Court's answer

In view of the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of directing the petitioners to co-operate with the enquiry and ongoing investigation undertaken by the third respondent police; no direction restraining the police from alleged harassment was issued.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), per L. Victoria Gowri, J., disposed of CRL OP(MD). No.1983 of 2026 filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 by four petitioners (Ambika, Mani, Sowmiya, Sabari) seeking a direction to the Inspector of Police, Thuraiyur Police Station not to harass them in the guise of enquiry on the complaint of respondents 4 and 5 (Saranya and Suganya). The Government Advocate reported that five complaints had been received against the petitioners, who were alleged to have habitually received money from various persons on the pretext of arranging jobs, and that enquiry was pending. Notice to respondents 4 and 5 was dispensed with as no adverse order was likely against them. The Court directed the petitioners to co-operate with the enquiry and ongoing investigation by the third respondent police; no anti-harassment direction was issued.

A

CRL OP(MD). No.1983 of 2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Dated : 03/02/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

CRL OP(MD). No.1983 of 2026

1.Ambika

2.Mani

3.Sowmiya

4.Sabari ... Petitioners

Vs

1.The Superintendent of Police, Thiruchirappalli District, Thiruchirappalli.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Musiri Division, Thiruchirappalli District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Thuraiyur Police Station, Thuraiyur Taluk, Thiruchirappalli District.

4.Saranya

5.Suganya ... Respondents

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to direct the respondents 3 and 4 not to harass the petitioners in the guise of enquiry on the false complaint of the fifth respondent.

1/5

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

CRL OP(MD). No.1983 of 2026

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Gowrishankar

For R1 to R3 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

Seeking to direct the third respondent not to harass the petitioners

in the guise of enquiry, this criminal original petition is filed.

2.Since no adverse order is likely to be passed against the respondent 4 and 5, notice to them is dispensed with.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that based upon

the complaint received from the fourth and fifth respondents against the petitioners, the third respondent police is subjecting the petitioners to harassment and hence, sought the indulgence of this Court.

4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side), on instructions, submitted that so far five complaints have been received

2/5

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

CRL OP(MD). No.1983 of 2026

against the petitioners. It was further submitted that, as per the modus operandi , the petitioners habitually received money from various persons on the pretext of arranging jobs and enquiry is pending.

5.In view of the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of directing the petitioners to co-operatie with the enquiry and ongoing investigation, which is undertaken by the third respondent police.

03.02.2026

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Rmk

3/5

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

CRL OP(MD). No.1983 of 2026

To

1.The Superintendent of Police, Thiruchirappalli District, Thiruchirappalli.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Musiri Division, Thiruchirappalli District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Thuraiyur Police Station, Thuraiyur Taluk, Thiruchirappalli District.

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

4/5

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

CRL OP(MD). No.1983 of 2026

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

Rmk

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1983 of 2026

Date : 03/02/2026

5/5

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

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the third respondent police is harassing the petitioners in the guise of enquiry on the complaint of the fourth and fifth respondents, and whether the Court should direct that such harassment cease.¶24
The court held
In view of the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of directing the petitioners to co-operate with the enquiry and ongoing investigation undertaken by the third respondent police; no direction restraining the police from alleged harassment was issued.ratio¶34

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

BNSS, 2023528¶17

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Notice to respondents 4 and 5 dispensed with, as no adverse order is likely to be passed against them.¶26
Prior proceeding
Complaints received from the fourth and fifth respondents against the petitioners, on which the third respondent police is conducting an enquiry; petitioners allege harassment.¶28
Prior proceeding
Government Advocate stated, on instructions, that five complaints have been received against the petitioners and that enquiry is pending into allegations that they habitually received money from various persons on the pretext of arranging jobs.¶33

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Ambika¶7
Mr.R.Gowrishankar
petitioner
Mani¶8
Mr.R.Gowrishankar
petitioner
Sowmiya¶9
Mr.R.Gowrishankar
petitioner
Sabari¶10
Mr.R.Gowrishankar
respondent
The Superintendent of Police, Thiruchirappalli District, Thiruchirappalli.¶12
Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
respondent
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Musiri Division, Thiruchirappalli District.¶13
Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
respondent
The Inspector of Police, Thuraiyur Police Station, Thuraiyur Taluk, Thiruchirappalli District.¶14
Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
respondent
Saranya¶15
respondent
Suganya¶16

Coram

AI extract

L.Victoria Gowriauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 3 Feb 2026 · February
Registered: 30 Jan 2026
Case no.: CRL OP(MD)/1983/2026
CNR: HCMD010138862026
Bench: L.victoria Gowri
Disposal: DISPOSED OF
Case type: CRL OP(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

Murugaraj Vs The Superintendent of Police
2 Feb 2026
Ramayee Vs The Superintendent of Police
2 Feb 2026
Veldurai Vs The Superintendent of Police
2 Feb 2026
Mutheeswari Vs The State of Tamilnadu
3 Feb 2026
Suresh Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Suchindram
3 Feb 2026
M.Sujatha Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Karungal
3 Feb 2026

Cite this judgement

Ambika v. The Superintendent of Police, CRL OP(MD)/1983/2026 (MAD), decided on 3 February 2026.

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

Statutes1

BNSS, 2023528

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Notice to respondents 4 and 5 dispensed with, as no adverse order is likely to be passed against them.
Complaints received from the fourth and fifth respondents against the petitioners, on which the third respondent police is conducting an enquiry; petitioners allege harassment.

View full history

Bench / Coram

L.Victoria Gowri

Parties & counsel