R. Selvalakshmi Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul and Another

R. Selvalakshmi vs The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Apr 21, 2016

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1191221

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1191221
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: P.N. Prakash
Decided On: Apr 21, 2016
Case Number: Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 5806 of 2016
Subject: Miscellaneous

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Miscellaneous

Key legal issue: Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

R. Selvalakshmi

Respondent

The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul and Another

Excerpt

(prayer: criminal original petition filed under section 482 of cr.p.c., praying to direct the 1st respondent to instruct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner and to pass other or further orders.) 1. this petition has been filedto direct the 1st respondent to instruct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitioner. 2. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned government advocate (crl.side) appearing for the state, who would, on instructions from the respondent police, submit that neither a case nor a petition enquiry is pending against this petitioner on the file of the respondent police. 3. recording the submission of the learned government advocate (crl.side), this criminal original petition is closed.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the 1^st respondent to instruct the 2^nd respondent not to harass the petitioner and to pass other or further orders.)

1. This petition has been filedto direct the 1^st respondent to instruct the 2^nd respondent not to harass the petitioner.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State, who would, on instructions from the respondent police, submit that neither a case nor a petition enquiry is pending against this petitioner on the file of the respondent police.

3. Recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), this Criminal Original Petition is closed.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties R. Selvalakshmi vs The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul and... Same Subject Miscellaneous Same Judge P.N. Prakash