Ravichandran v. The Superintendent Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR W.P.No.9461 of 2021 Ravichandran
...Petitioner
Versus
1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of Superintendent of Police, Chengalpattu District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Sunambedu Police Station, Chengalpattu District.
...Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to provide police protection for petitioner's agricultural land situated at Survey No.95/1, Vepanur - Kadapakkam villae, Cheyyur Taluk, Chengalpattu District, to an extent of 2.13 acre. For Petitioner : Mr.E.Felix Parthiban For Respondents : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
This petition is filed seeking a direction to direct the respondent to provide police protection for petitioner's agricultural land situated at Survey No.95/1, Vepanur - Kadapakkam villae, Cheyyur Taluk, Chengalpattu District, to an extent of 2.13 acre.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a leaseholder of the property. He has taken up the property on lease vide two lease deed dated 13.08.2020 entered into between Lessor Shrimath. Shivagananbalaya Swamigal, Aadheenathar of Bomaipalyam Shrimath Gnana Rajadhani Bomaipalyam Thirukailaya Parambarai Periyamadam Sivakanj Mayurasala Nivas Ethisvara Kartha Mailyan Pommapura, Vannur Taluk, Guindy, Chennai and the petitioner herein. Further, he submitted that https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
lessor had leased out 1.50 acres in one lease deed and 63 cents in another lease deed, totally 2.13 acres of land leased out for agricultural purpose. The petitioner had paid an advance amount of Rs.2 Lakhs and the yearly lease was fixed at the rate of Rs.25,000/-, for a period of three years. Now, one Abubakker Siddique, S/o. Ahemed Sayin, who is a resident of Kadapakkam Village, is interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner's property and threatening him. Therefore, the petitioner has come up with the present petition before this Court.
3.It is noticed that there is some civil dispute between the parties and the petitioner is seeking police protection. In view of the same, this Court is of the view that when the dispute is purely a civil dispute between the parties, the direction to issue police protection cannot be considered. 4.With the above observation, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
-s/d- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar klt To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of Superintendent of Police, Chengalpattu District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Sunambedu Police Station, Chengalpattu District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
W.P.No.9461 of 2021 UM(CO) SP(08/07/2021) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/