R.Vethagiri v. The Revenue Divisional Officer,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN R.Vethagiri

...Petitioner

Vs.

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, South Madras Division, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032

2. The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police (L&O) J-4, Kottupuram Police Station, Chennai - 600 085.

3. The Assistant Commissioner, Kotturpuram Police Division, Kotturpuram, Chennai - 600 085.

4. J.Paul Moses

5. S.Chitra

6. M.Jayakumar

7. S.Muthucholan

8. S.Elavarasan ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. to call for the entire records in respect of the impugned order dated 31.12.2024 passed by the first respondent in br/K/M/vz;/m2-1022-2022 set aside the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.E.Chelliah, Senior Counsel for Mr.D.Madhusudanan For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath for R1 to R3 Mrs.M.Devi Rudra for R5, R6, R9 No appearance for R4, R7, R8.

ORDER

This Criminal Revision Case is filed as against the order dated 31.12.2024 passed by the first respondent in br/K/M/vz;/m2-1022-2022 thereby issuing directions to both the parties to conduct the church proceedings.

2. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner produced several documents to show that they are in possession of Carmel House of Prayer Trust and administering the Church, the first respondent failed to consider the same and directed both the parties to run the Church peacefully and granted liberty to both the parties to conduct election and to administer the Church.

3. On perusal of records it reveals that the Revenue Divisional Officer passed an order under Section 145 Cr.P.C. based on the report submitted by the second respondent. There is a dispute between the petitioner and the

respondents 4 to 8 in respect of the administering the Carmel House of Prayer Trust. Therefore, the respondents 4 to 8 approached the Civil Court for injunction. While pending the suit, there was a dispute between the parties and as such the second respondent submitted a report before the first respondent to conduct an enquiry under Section 145 Cr.P.C. After due enquiry and after giving opportunity to both the sides, the Revenue Divisional Officer directed both the parties to conduct the administration of the Trust in a peaceful manner without causing any disturbance to the public and also observed that if any offence is committed by any of the parties, the second respondent is directed to take appropriate action as against them. Therefore, this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by first respondent.

4. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner insisted that though several documents were filed in order to prove that the petitioner is administering said Trust, the Revenue Divisional Officer failed to consider the same. Even assuming that there are documents available in favour of the petitioner, the first respondent is not a competent person to decide the rights of the petitioner or the respondents 4 to 8 over the administration of the said Trust. Therefore, the parties are at liberty to approach the Civil Court for

appropriate relief to declare their rights over the said Trust.

5. In view of the above, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. 04.08.2025 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order bkn G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The matter is listed today under the caption 'for being mentioned' in the Chamber at the instance of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proceedings of the RDO have been wrongly mentioned in prayer portion as well as in the first paragraph as nr.K.M.vz;.m2/1022/2022 instead of nr.K.M.vz;.m2/1022/2024. Therefore, he prays for appropriate corrections.

3.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Registry is directed to make corrections by mentioning nr.K.M.vz;.m2/1022/2024,

wherever required. Further, in the order dated 04.08.2025, the Registry is directed to incorporate the following sentence in paragraph 5 'Consequently, connected Crl.M.P.No.296 of 2025 is closed' and to issue a fresh corrected order copy to the petitioner.

4. In all other aspects, the order dated 04.08.2025 shall remain unaltered.

5.Registry is directed to carry out the aforesaid corrections and issue corrected copy to the respective parties.

12.12.2025 ps To

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, South Madras Division, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032

2. The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police (L&O) J-4, Kottupuram Police Station, Chennai - 600 085.

3. The Assistant Commissioner, Kotturpuram Police Division, Kotturpuram, Chennai - 600 085.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

bkn 04.08.2025