W.P.Crl.No.842 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 16.09.2025 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR W.P.Crl.No.842 of 2025 K.Paulraj ... Petitioner Versus 1.The Commissioner of Police Office of the Tambaram Commissioner of Police Sholinganallur 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer Office of the Revenue Division Guindy, South Chennai Division Chennai – 600 032 3.The Inspector of Police Chemmancherry Police Station Chennai 4.S.Madhan ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent, the Inspector of Police, Chemmancherry Police Station, Chennai to get back th jewels and articles mentioned in the petitioner's representation dated 05.08.2025 from the fourth respondent and his family members. For Petitioner : Mr.C.D.Johnson For Respondents : Mr.R.Vinothraja for R1 to R3 Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER ________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl.No.842 of 2025 The petitioner seeks a direction as against the third respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and recover the ornaments from the fourth respondent/ husband of the deceased Aruna. 2. It is the contention of the petitioner that at the time of marriage of his daughter deceased Aruna, he had given 30 sovereigns of gold jewels and various other movables to the fourth respondent. Due to dowry harassment, his daughter committed suicide on 17.06.2024, thereby, the fourth respondent and his entire family members are prosecuted separately. At this stage, the petitioner had given representation to the third respondent to recover the sreedhana properties. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and perused the materials placed on record. 4. At the outset, this Court is of the view that such a blanket direction cannot be given to the police officials. Whether the petitioner has given sreedhana properties to the fourth respondent or not are disputed facts that cannot be relegated to the police authorities. If at all, the petitioner has grievance, the proper remedy of the petitioner is to file suit for recovery of ________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl.No.842 of 2025 articles and not a direction for the police officials. 5. Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed. No costs. 16.09.2025 dhk Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes/No To 1.The Commissioner of Police Office of the Tambaram Commissioner of Police Sholinganallur 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer Office of the Revenue Division Guindy, South Chennai Division Chennai – 600 032 3.The Inspector of Police Chemmancherry Police Station Chennai ________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl.No.842 of 2025 N. SATHISH KUMAR, J. dhk W.P.Crl.No.842 of 2025 16.09.2025 ________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis