J.Rajendran v. The Commissioner Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24.03.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN W.P.No. 10354 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.11656 of 2025 J.Rajendran .....

Petitioner Vs

1. The Commissioner of Police Tambaram Commissioner Office, Solinganallur, Chennai-600 119.

2. The Inspector of Police, Perumbakkam Police Station, Perumbakkam, Chennai-600 119

3. R.Manoj Kumar

4. R.Vasantha Kanvar ....

Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 in any manner interfering with the civil dispute over the properties of the petitioner situated at Survey No.230/11 and survey No.24/1B Sithalapakkam Village, Tambaram Taluk, Chengalpet District grossly in violation of PSO 562 of Tamilnadu Police Standing orders under the guise of enquiring the complaint given by the respondents 3

and 4.

For Petitioner : Mr.Eswar For R1 & R2 : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 in any manner interfering with the civil dispute over the properties of the petitioner comprised in Survey No.230/11 and survey No.24/1B situated at Sithalapakkam Village, Tambaram Taluk, Chengalpet District, in gross violation of PSO 562 of Tamil Nadu Police Standing orders, under the guise of enquiring into the complaint lodged by the respondents 3 and 4.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 and perused the materials available on record.

3. It is seen that there is a civil dispute pending between the petitioner and the respondents 3 and 4. While being so, the third respondent lodged a complaint before the second respondent. On receipt

of the same, the second respondent issued a summons to the petitioner.

4. In view of the above, it is evident that the second respondent has no role to play in the civil dispute pending between the petitioner and the respondents 3 and 4. However, if any congnizable offence made out in the complaint lodged by the third respondent, the second respondent is directed to proceed with the complaint in accordance with law.

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

24.03.2025 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No Lpp To

1. The Commissioner of Police Tambaram Commissioner Office, Solinganallur, Chennai-600 119.

2. The Inspector of Police, Perumbakkam Police Station,

Perumbakkam, Chennai-600 119

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

Lpp 24.03.2025