Usaina Banu v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.03.2026 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Usaina Banu .. Petitioner

Versus

1. The Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore District.

2. The Inspector of Police, DCB-II, Cuddalore District.

.. Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent No.2 to take an appropriate action based on petitioner's representation, dated 04.02.2026 in SPGP No.129 of 2026 pending before the 2nd respondent Police within a stipulated period of time as fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Manikandan For Respondents : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed for a direction to the second respondent to take an appropriate action based on petitioner's 1/5

representation, dated 04.02.2026 in SPGP No.129 of 2026 pending before the second respondent Police within a stipulated period of time as fixed by this Court.

2. The petitioner had sent a representation on 04.02.2026. Thereafter, though the same has been assigned SPGP No.129 of 2026, enquiry is still pending before the second respondent. Therefore, she filed this petition seeking for disposal of her representation.

3. On a perusal of the representation, dated 04.02.2026, it is seen that the petitioner's father, Mohamed Arif and her mother, late Fathima have three children including the petitioner. The petitioner's sister is Riyathunnisa and her brother is Noor Mohamed. The property was purchased by her parents in S.No.100/33 to an extent of 0.01.54 ares and all the three children are entitled to the property. This being so, after the demise of the petitioner's mother, her brother, Noor Mohamed, had created a forged will and the patta was changed in his name. Against which, the petitioner lodged an objection with the revenue authorities. Since no action has been taken, the petitioner filed W.P.No.13299 of 2025 and based on the directions of this Court, the forged patta had been cancelled 2/5

and the patta No.1348 was issued and the Sub-Collector, Chidambaram issued proceedings on 22.04.2025. She has now filed a petition to take action against her brother's wife, on whose instigation, her brother acted.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that on the representation of the petitioner, both the petitioner and her brother were called for an enquiry. Both the parties sought for some time to produce further documents to substantiate their claim. Now, the enquiry is pending.

5. From the representation, it is seen that the petitioner's prayer can be agitated and decided only by filing a Civil Suit. In any event, the respondent Police is directed to complete the process of enquiry within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

17.03.2026 Index : yes/no Speaking order/Non-speaking order : yes/no grs 3/5

To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore District.

2. The Inspector of Police, DCB-II, Cuddalore District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

4/5

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

grs 17.03.2026 5/5