ANBUKARASI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner approaches this Court with a prayer to direct the 1st respondent to transfer the investigation of the case in crime No.4 of 2010 on the file of the 3rd respondent police to any other competent investigation officer under the supervision of the 1st respondent.

(2.) The petitioner married one Ilavarasan on 10.02.2008 and it was an arranged marriage. After the marriage, she was leading her matrimonial life with her husband only for a period of 20 days and due to work nature, the husband of the petitioner left for Kuwaith on 04.03.2008 and hence she stayed her sister-in-law's house viz., Jeyanthi, where she was asked to go to her mother-in-law's residence and she was treated very worstly by her in-laws by demanding more dowries and she was subjected to the cruelty by her husband's family viz., Jeyanthi, Murugan, Durai Natarajan, Durai Rajkumar, Durai Sivakumar, Kala and her mother-in-law one Shanthi and demanded to bring 10 sovereign of gold and 1 lakh cash from her father as additional dowry. That factum has been ventilated to her husband over phone and her husband advised her to act on the advice of the family members and subsequently he refused to talk with her. On 08.05.2009 a.m., the petitinoer's in-laws attacked by tearing the petitioner's blouse and trying to set her ablaze by pouring kerosene over her body. On the alarm given by the petitioner, she was rescued by neighbours and on the information given by the neighbours, the petitioner's parents came there and took her to their house. Immediately she preferred a complaint before the 3rd respondent and a receipt has been given, but they have not taken any steps, since the petitioner's in-laws are influencing the 3rd respondent.

(3.) In the year 2009, the petitioner's husband came to India and at that time, the petitioner requested the 3rd respondent to take action on the complaint given by her, but no action has been taken. On 30.05.2010, the S.I of Police one Rekahrani vijayalakshmi attached to the 3rd respondent police station asked her and family members to come for the negotiation with the petitioner's in-laws. Believing their words, the petitioner and her sister Kavitha went to 3rd respondent police station, where the petitioner husband and his family were present. During the negotiation, she was abused by her husband and his brothers and sisters with filthy language and they assaulted the husband of the pettiioner's sister indiscriminately. Again the petitioner approached the 1st respondent and lodged a complaint stating that the 3rd respondent refused to take effective steps on her complaint and supported her husband's family. Thereafter, on instruction given by the 1st respondent, a case has been registered by the 3rd respondent in crime No.4 of 2010 against the petitioner's husband and his family members for the offence under section 294(b), 352, 506(1), and 498 (A) of I.P.C and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.