Madras High Court
N.Priya vs The Chief Secretary To Government ... on 5 September, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.09.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.No.14070 of 2015
N.Priya ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Chief Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu,
Secretariat Building,
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Deputy Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu,
Home, Prohibition and Excise – XII Department,
Secretariat Building,
Chennai – 600 009. ....Respondents
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India,
seeking a writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent herein to
dispose the representation dated 8.1.2015 within the stipulated period
prescribed by this Court.
For Petitioner :Mr.G.Thangavel
For Respondents : Mr.Sanjay Gandhi,
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the 1 st
respondent to dispose of the representation dated 08.01.2015 within a
time stipulated by this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. It is the case of the petitioner that due to family dispute the
husband of the petitioner has been falsely implicated in four criminal
cases by his family members in the year 2014 and based on which, the
husband of the petitioner was kept under detention but it was
subsequently set aside by the trial Court and the same ended with
acquittal. Therefore, by claiming that her husband was falsely implicated
in criminal case, the petitioner made a representation on 08.01.2015
before the first respondent. As no steps have been taken on the
representation, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the
Writ Petition.
3. The respondents filed a detailed counter affidavit, stating that
there are three cases registered against the husband of the petitioner in
Cr.No.1077 of 2014, Cr.No.1536 of 2014 and Cr.No.1211 of 2014.
Thereafter 14 of 1982 was also invoked by branding him as Goonda.
The earlier representation given by the petitioner on 20.12.2014 was
disposed on 19.01.2015. The trial Court acquitted the accused only
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
based on benefit of doubt and therefore it cannot be said that the husband
of the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the criminal cases.
4. I have perused the materials available on record.
5. The main grievance of the petitioner is that her representation
dated 08.01.2015 is directed to be considered. According to the
petitioner, her husband has been falsely implicated by the Police
Officials. Therefore she seeks a direction to consider her representation.
On a perusal of the Judgment of the learned Judicial Magistrate III,
Thiruppur, it is made clear that the trial Court had acquitted the accused
mainly based on benefit of doubt. Even assuming that the husband of the
petitioner has been falsely implicated, the remedy lies only for damages
for malicious prosecution and not by way of representation before this
Court. I do not find any merits in this case. Accordingly, this Writ
Petition is dismissed. No costs.
05.09.2022
Index: Yes/No
Speaking order/Non speaking order
vum
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
N.SATHISH KUMAR,J.
Vum
To
1. The Chief Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu,
Secretariat Building,
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Deputy Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu,
Home, Prohibition and Excise – XII Department,
Secretariat Building,
Chennai – 600 009.
W.P.No.14070 of 2015
05.09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
