V.Ponnurangam v. State Rep By Its
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN W.P.No.9175 of 2025 V.Ponnurangam ... Petitioner Vs.
1.State rep by its:
The Superintendent of Police, Sathuvachari, Vellore District, Tamil Nadu 632 012.
2.The Inspector of Police Bagayam Police Station, Vellore District.
3.Murugesan 4.Thiyagarajan 5.Senthil Kumar 6.B.K.Kumar 7.Balan ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the first and second respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 27.01.2025 and provide necessary police protection to the petitioner and his widow sister viz., Miss.Vijayalakshmi and their property comprised in Survey Nos.187/2U3A, 187/2U3B, 187/2U3C, measuring to an extent of Acre.2.4 Cents is situated in Edayansathu Village, Vellore District. For Petitioner : Mr.V.P.Raju For R1 and R2 : Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (crl.side)
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed seeking police protection for the petitioner and his widowed sister, M/s. Vijayalakshmi, as well as for their property comprised in Survey Nos. 187/2U3A, 187/2U3B, 187/2U3C, measuring an extent of 2.4 acres, situated in Edayansathu Village, Vellore District, against the actions of the respondents 3 to 7 herein.
2. The petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the property situated in Edayansathu Village, Vellore District, comprised in the aforementioned survey numbers. The petitioner had previously obtained a decree in O.S.No.964 of 2000 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Vellore, declaring that the sale deed executed in favour of the third respondent is null and void. Notwithstanding this, the petitioner apprehends a threat from respondents 3 to 7 regarding the property.
3. Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record.
4. Though the petitioner is in enjoyment and possession of the property, it is alleged that respondents 3 to 7 have attempted to trespass into the subject land and to unlawfully seize the property. In such circumstances, the petitioner ought to have approached the Civil Court for appropriate relief against the third respondent in the event of any dispute over title or possession. Police protection can only be granted in cases where there is a threat to the life or limb of the petitioner, not for the protection of property rights.
5. In view of the above, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.
17.03.2025 : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order shk
To
1. Additional District Munsif Court, Vellore 2.The Superintendent of Police, Sathuvachari, Vellore District, Tamil Nadu 632 012.
3.The Inspector of Police Bagayam Police Station, Vellore District.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
shk W.P.No.9175 of 2025 17.03.2025