Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2172 (MAD)

S. Nithya Priyanka v. Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram

2017-07-24

S.S.SUNDAR

body2017
ORDER : This Criminal Original Petition has been filed praying this Court to direct the second respondent to conduct a preliminary enquiry and to take appropriate action on the basis of the complaint given by the Petitioner in C.S.R.No.70 of 2017, dated 25.5.2017. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the respondents and perused the materials placed before this Court. 4. The Petitioner has given a complaint against her in-laws. 4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side), on instructions, would submit that after completing the preliminary enquiry, the complaint was closed with the knowledge of the Petitioner. The statement of the learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side)is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that no copy of the closure report was furnished to the Petitioner. 6. In view of the above said submission made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, the second respondent-Police is directed to furnish a copy of the closure report to the Petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7.With the above direction, the Criminal Original petition is closed.