IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Sunder Mohan, J
K.Megala – Appellant
Versus
1.The Superintendent of Police, 2.The Inspector of Police, 3.Poomalar – Respondent
ORDER
The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to close the FIR in Crime No.276 of 2025 as mistake of fact and to take action against the third respondent, by considering the petitioner's complaint dated 06.11.2025.
2.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police, on instructions, would submit that the third respondent had lodged a complaint on 04.09.2025 stating that the petitioner, who was then a minor, went missing; that the respondent police, therefore, went in search of the petitioner; that the respondent police have not harassed the petitioner in any manner; that if the petitioner, who has now attained majority (DOB:04.11.2007) is voluntarily staying with someone, the respondent police would close the case recording the said fact.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is living with her aunt at Pudukottai, as the third respondent is forcing to marry a person against her wish.
4.The petitioner is present in person and has produced her Aadhar card. She is accompanied by her aunt, Selvi, and claims that she is staying with her aunt, Selvi at Pudukkottai. Since the petitioner has now attained majori
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.