1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.01.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.No.599 of 2011 Mallika ... Petitioner Vs. State rep. By 1.The Inspector of Police, Kadayanallur Police Station, Tirunelveli District. 2.The Woman Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tenkasi, Tirunelveli District. 3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Puliyankudi, Tirunelveli District. 4.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli. ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to direct the 1st respondent not to harss the petitioner and thereby complel her to abort her pregnancy or foist any false case against her. For Petitioner :: Mr.N.Mohideen Basha For Respondents :: Mr.L.Murugan Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the 1st respondent not to harss the petitioner and thereby complel her to abort her pregnancy or foist any false case against her. 2.Heard Mr.N.Mohideen Basha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.L.Murugan, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the State. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the petitioner is pregnant through one Dr.K.Ananth, husband of the defacto complainant Bhuvaneswari. He would further submit that after hearing the petitioner is pregnant https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 through Dr.K.Anand, the relatives and well wishers of the said Bhuvaneswari, who are having influence with the police officials and politicians, trying to foist a false case against the petitioner and compelling her to abort the foetus and therefore, he requests the Court for a direction not to harass the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) would submit in his argument that there is no harassment as submitted by the petitioner and the petitioner was called for enquiry on the complaint given by one Bhuvaneswari and there shall not be any harassment. 5.Recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (criminal side), this Court is inclined to issue a direction to the 1st respondent police that the petitioner shall not be harassed and enquiry shall be conducted by following procedure contemplated under D.K.Basu Vs. State of West Bengal reported in AIR (1997) SC 610. 6.The Criminal Original Petition is disposed of, after recording the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side). Sd/- Deputy Registrar(LA) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Inspector of Police, Kadayanallur Police Station, Tirunelveli District. 2.The Woman Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tenkasi,Tirunelveli District. 3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Puliyankudi, Tirunelveli District. 4.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District,Tirunelveli. 5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1cc to Mr.N.Mohideen Basha, Advocate, Sr.No.2049 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.599 of 2011 arul/SMA/1.2.2011/7C/2P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/