Madras High Court
WP CRL.(MD)/4647/2026 of T.Sabiyula Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by on 16 September 2026
WP.Crl.(MD) No. 4647 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 16.09.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE P. MURUGAN
WP.Crl.(MD) No. 4647 of 2026
{CNR: HCMD011100202026} Case QR
T.Sabiyula
D/o. K.Thanagavelu
Eechampatti
Sindhupatti
Madurai – 625529
... Petitioner
Vs
1. State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by The Superintendent of Police,
Madurai District
Madurai.
2. State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by The Deputy Superintendent of Police Samayanallur Madurai District.
3. State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by The Inspector of Police
AWPS, Samayanallur
Madurai District.
4. Tamilselvam
5. Jeyakodi
6. Parvathi
7. Chellapandi
8. Nivetha
... Respondents
For Petitioner
: Mr. R. Rajasekaran
For Respondents
: Mr.C.Susikumar
Government Advocate (crl. Side) for R1 to 3
: Mrs.S. Packiyamuthu
: No appearance for R5 to 8
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to conduct a fair and expeditious investigation and take appropriate action against the private respondents in accordance with law by considering the petitioner's representation dated 28.07.2026, within the stipulated time fixed by this Court.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Mr.C.Susikumar, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) takes notice for the respondents 1 to 3 and Mrs.S. Packiyamuthu, learned counsel appeared for the fourth respondent. Even though notice was served on the respondents 5 to 8, there is no representation on their behalf. Their names have been printed in the cause list.
2. The case of the petitioner is as that the petitioner married the fourth respondent and there is some dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent, during which, the 4th respondent assaulted the petitioner and thereby, the petitioner lodged a complaint dated 28.07.2006 before the Superintendent of Police, Madurai. As no action was taken by the police, the present Petition has been filed.
3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the online complaint submitted by the petitioner to the Superintendent of Police, Madurai, was received by the third respondent, and the enquiry is pending. He further submitted that the petitioner had already filed another complaint, pursuant to which, after enquiry, the household articles of the petitioner were returned by the 4th respondent. Accordingly, the previous complaint was closed and the present complaint is a subsequent complaint, and the police have to enquire the same.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent submitted that the complaint facts are totally false.
5. Without going into the merits of the case, the third respondent is directed to expedite the enquiry into the petitioner's complaint dated 28.07.2026 and enquire the petitioner as well as the private respondents and proceed further in accordance with law. The third respondent shall complete the enquiry and dispose the petitioner's representation dated 28.07.2026 as per law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. 16.09.2026 LS To
1. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District Madurai.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Samayanallur Madurai District
3. The Inspector of Police AWPS, Samayanallur Madurai District
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
DR. P. MURUGAN,J. LS W.P.Crl.(MD)No.4647 of 2026 16.09.2026