Disposed¶26

Sangeetha v. The Commissioner of Police Tambaram

Madras HC24 Mar 2026WP Crl./492/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, WP Crl. No. 492 of 2026, disposed 24-03-2026 by M. Nirmal Kumar, J. Keywords: writ of mandamus; Article 226; police harassment; unauthorized entry and search of residence; Chromepet Police Station Special Team; Kundrathur PEW; Tambaram Police Commissionerate; petitioner Sangeetha; husband Vincent employed with PAY TM, Bangalore; suspect in drugs and narcotics sale to college students; husband appeared before police 16.03.2026 and undertook to cooperate; police undertaking not to enter residence while husband cooperates; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of on recording the respondent Police's undertaking that there will be no necessity to enter the petitioner's residence in search of her husband so long as he cooperates with the investigation; no costs awarded. ¶26

Sangeetha Vs The Commissioner of Police Tambaram — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether police personnel and guards entered the petitioner's residence without authorization on 25.06.2025, searched it in connection with her husband, and harassed/abused the family. +1 more

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Recording the submissions, the Court noted that the respondent Police undertook that, as long as the petitioner's husband cooperates with the investigation, there shall be no necessity to enter the petitioner's residence in search of him.

¶25

Key takeaways

Recording the said undertaking of the respondent Police, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with no costs.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (M. Nirmal Kumar, J.), WP Crl. No. 492 of 2026, order dated 24-03-2026: Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by Sangeetha, wife of Vincent, seeking a mandamus to restrain the 2nd respondent police and subordinates from harassing her and her family in the guise of investigation/search. Petitioner alleged that on 25.06.2025 at about 10:00 p.m., police personnel and guards entered her residence without authorization, searched the premises in connection with her husband, and abused the family before relatives; her representation dated 17.12.2025 elicited no action. The Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the husband, a suspect in a case involving sale of drugs and narcotics to college students, appeared before the police on 16.03.2026, furnished his details and undertook to cooperate with the investigation. Recording the respondent Police's undertaking that, so long as the husband cooperates with the investigation, there would be no necessity to enter the petitioner's residence in search of him, the Court disposed of the writ petition, awarding no costs.

¶1

WP Crl. No. 492 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 24-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

WP Crl. No. 492 of 2026

Sangeetha

..Petitioner(s)

The Commissioner of Police Tambaram, Police Commissionerate, Karapakkam, Elcot Sez, Shollinganallur, Chennai - 600 119.

¶11

The Inspector of Police, Special Team, Chromepet Police Station, Chennai - 600044.

¶12

The Inspector of Police, Kundrathur PEW, Chennai - 600 069.

¶13

..Respondent(s)

¶14

PRAYER: T his Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus to direct the 2^nd respondent police or their subordinates not to harass the petitioner and her family members in the guise of investigation/search.

¶15

__________ Page1 of 4

¶16

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

¶17

WP Crl. No. 492 of 2026

¶18

For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Kishore Kumar For Respondent(s): M/s. Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶19

Order

¶20

The petitioner, who is the wife of Vincent, submitted a representation dated 17.12.2025 stating that her marriage was solemnized on 12.07.2024 and that she has a five-month-old child. She is residing on the ground floor of her father-in-law’s property. The petitioner’s husband is employed with "PAY TM", a private company, and is working in Bangalore. According to the petitioner, on 25.06.2025, being the wedding anniversary of her father-in-law and mother-inlaw, certain celebrations were held at their residence. On that day, at about 10:00 p.m., a group of Police personnel and guards allegedly entered the petitioner’s house, searched the premises in connection with her husband, and subjected the family members to abuse and harassment in the presence of their relatives, thereby causing humiliation. It is further stated that the Police personnel entered the house without authorization and failed to provide valid reasons for such entry and search. Despite the petitioner submitting a representation regarding the said harassment, no action was taken, which led to the filing of the present writ petition.

¶21

__________ Page2 of 4

¶22

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

¶23

WP Crl. No. 492 of 2026

¶24

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that, based on the allegations, the petitioner’s husband appeared before the respondent Police on 16.03.2026, furnished his details, and gave an undertaking that he would cooperate with the investigation and appear as and when required. It was further submitted that the petitioner’s husband is a suspect in a case involving the sale of drugs and narcotics to college students, and therefore, his movements are required to be monitored.

¶25

Considering the submissions made on both sides, and in view of the fact that the petitioner’s husband has furnished his details and expressed willingness to cooperate with the enquiry, the respondent Police have also undertaken that, as long as the petitioner’s husband cooperates with the investigation, there shall be no necessity to enter the petitioner’s residence in search of him.

¶26