The police communicated the decision to the XVII metropolitan magistrate at Saidapet on May 23 saying the dowry harassment case against him is to be closed. Grahalakshmi is entitled to lodge her objections in 15 days.
It all began on September 14, 2007, when police registered a case after Grahalakshmi first lodged a complaint against Prashanth and then moved the Madras high court to obtain a direction to the city police to register an FIR. Besides the actor, Grahalakshmi had cited his actor-father S Thiagarajan, mother Shanthi and sister T Preethi as aggressors. All of them, however, obtained bail.
Grahalakshmi had alleged that she was treated as a “dirt,” forced to eat non-vegetarian food items, put in solitary confinement, prevented from making calls to her parents, not allowed to bolt her bedroom and not allowed to live in peace.
As her father had passed away during the intervening period, the investigating officer could record Grahalakshmi’s statements only on April 22. Among others, the official had inquired Dr Rangabashyam, advocate Nalini Chidambaram, actor Viji, dance master Kala, her alleged “first husband” Narayanan Venu Prasad, servant and housekeeping agent of Thiagarajan’s house.
The report cited Grahalakshmi as saying on several occasions that neither her husband Prashanth nor her inlaws harassed her for dowry and that she was not treated cruelly. “Mrs Grahalakshmi admitted that Mr Prashanth and his family did not demand any dowry and further they (Grahalakshmi’s family) have not paid any dowry to them,” the report said.
Citing independent witnesses, the report said the allegation of Grahalakshmi and her family members was “baseless”.
As for Grahalakshmi’s allegation that she was not allowed to accompany her husband for shoots, Prashanth’s family had told the police that the actor did not want to expose her to the public.
As against Grahalakshmi’s claim that she was not allowed to make calls to her parents, the report referred to two SIM cards used by her and said her allegation was baseless. Also, her brothers visited her at Thiagarajan’s house and it was supported by independent witnesses, the report said. “Her movement was not restricted and she was taken to various hospitals and temples by her in-laws,” it added. Source: timesofindia.com