The court here has criticised the conduct of a policewoman in keeping in her personal custody the jewels of a petitioner and being ignorant of an intimation by a magistrate.

It ordered the submission in court of an action taken report following an inquiry by a senior police officer into the case.

A dowry harassment case was taken to the all-woman police station of Uthamapalayam in 2008 and a series of compromises was arranged by the police between the petitioner and his estranged wife, albeit it resulting in application for divorce.

The man and his mother obtained bail in 2010, despite which the police registered a fresh case and arrested the two.

Besides, the petitioner contended, the DSP and inspector (Uthamapalayam taluk) and sub-inspector Senthamarai (all-woman police station, Uthamapalayam), at the instance of his wife, went to his bank and took possession of 691 gm of jewels, held jointly in their names, without a warrant.

He said he later came to know that the jewels were in the personal custody of the sub-inspector.

He prayed that the court direct the return of the jewels to the bank till the divorce petition is disposed of.
Justice K.K. Sasidharan observed, “The property is still in the custody of fourth respondent.

The custody is nothing but illegal. The fourth respondent (sub-inspector) has no business to keep the property in her possession.

The director general of police is directed to conduct an inquiry through a superior police officer and take appropriate action in the matter. The report of such inquiry and an action taken report should be submitted before this court positively by 26 March, 2012.”