Raghulan v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR Raghulan ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police Vellore District.

2. The Inspector of Police Bagayam Police Station, Vellore District.

3. Raja

4. Palani ..Respondent(s) To direct the 2nd respondent to conduct the enquiry who is the real owner of the property and complete the investigation regarding the petitioner's land situated in Virupachipuram village, Survey No. 15/21 admeasuring 2200 sq.ft on the basis of petitioner's representation R1, R2 dt. 15.12.2025 and considering the same within stipulated time.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.N.Saravanan For Respondent(s):

Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, Additional Public Prosecutor, For R1 & R2

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent to conduct an enquiry with regard to the petitioner's land situated at Virupachipuram village, Survey No. 15/21 admeasuring 2200 sq.ft and to remove the encroachment on the basis of his representation dt. 15.12.2025.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that his grandfather, namely Murugesan, was the owner of the property measuring 2200 sq.ft. in Survey No.15/21 situated at Virupachipuram Village, Vellore and the patta stood in his name under patta No.1025. After his grandfather passed away on 10.07.1993, the property devolved upon his mother Yasoda. Subsequently, she passed away on 29.01.2024 and the petitioner and his brother inherited the property. Thereafter, the petitioner's brother settled his share in favour of the petitioner vide document No.5525/2025 dated 28.05.2025. At present, the patta stands in the name of the petitioner.

3. It is further stated that the petitioner, who is employed in Chennai, on visiting his native place found that the property had been occupied by one Raja and Palani. When questioned, they allegedly abused and attempted to assault him. They further claimed that they are local residents and nothing can be done to them. The petitioner lodged a complaint on 15.10.2025 and no action has been taken. Hence, he submitted another complaint on 15.12.2025.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that based on the petitioner's complaint dated 15.10.2025, a petition in C.No.1354/SPG/2025 was assigned. The said Raja and Palani were called for enquiry, and based on their undertaking, the complaint was closed. It is further submitted that the present complaint is a similar complaint without any proof.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that according to the respondent Police, the property is not encumbered by the said Raja or Palani. It is also contended that the petitioner, being an absentee landowner, ought to take steps to secure the property and ensure proper fencing.

6. Considering the above submissions made and on perusal of records, this Court directs the petitioner to approach the respondent Police with relevant materials to substantiate the allegation of encroachment. Upon such materials being produced, if it is found that there is encroachment, the respondent Police shall take appropriate action in accordance with law.

7. With the above direction, this petition is disposed of. No costs. 16-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order PVS

To

1. The Superintendent of Police Vellore District.

2. The Inspector of Police Bagayam Police Station, Vellore District.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

PVS 16-03-2026