1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:02.06.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P(MD)No.6484 of 2011 Diviya :Petitioner -Vs- 1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Chinna Dharapuram Police Station, Karur District. :Respondents PRAYER:Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondent police to give adequate police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and to pass such further or other orders. For Petitioner :Mr.R.M.Anbunithi For Respondents:Ms.S.Prabha, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) ORDER This Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner. 2.Heard Mr.R.M.Anbunithi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms.S.Prabha, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the State. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the petitioner had married with one Karuppusamy on 16.03.2011 and due to ill treatment and cruelty committed against the petitioner by her husband she left the matrimonial home and her husband has preferred a false complaint before the respondent police as if she was kidnapped by some one and he is often threatening the petitioner to murder her and therefore the petitioner has given a complaint to the first respondent police against the said persons through telegram. He would further submit that if for any reason, the petitioner is not given with any protection by the respondent police, there may be a threat to the life and limb of the petitioner and therefore he would request the Court that the petitioner may be given police protection for her life and limb. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit in her argument that the respondent police is always duty bound to protect every citizen's life and limb and the respondent police would give police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner. Therefore, she would request the Court to pass suitable orders. 5.I have given anxious thoughts to the arguments advanced on either side. 6.The documents produced by the petitioner in the form of typed set of papers would go to show that there was a dispute in between the petitioner and her husband. Whether the source of apprehension is true or not, the police has to protect the life of every citizen and therefore the petitioner's apprehension may be sustained. 7.The respondent police is also willing to provide protection to the life and limb of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is convinced to direct the respondent police to provide police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner alone. 8.Accordingly, this Court is inclined to direct the respondent police to provide police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner. With the above direction, this Petition is ordered. Sd/- Deputy Registrar / TRUE COPY / Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Chinna Dharapuram Police Station, Karur District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1CC to Mr.R.Anbunithi, Advocate. SR.No.17176. Smn RP/08.06.2011/2P/5C. Crl.O.P(MD)No.6484 of 2011 02.06.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/