Apurvam v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN W.P.No.11949 of 2025 Apurvam ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Viluppuram District 605 602.

2.Inspector of Police, Vikravandi Police Station, Viluppuram 605 652.

3.Vasantha 4.Vimal 5.Sampath 6.Thangam 7.Muthulakshmi 8.Nattamai Kathirvel ..Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 / Police Authorities to provide adequate police

protection, enabling the petitioner to carry out agricultural activities, specifically the harvesting of Savukku (Casuarina) trees without any interference.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.S.Ganesh For R1 and R2 : Mr.R.Vinothraja, Government Advocate (crl.side)

O R D E R

This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner, enabling her to carry out agricultural activities, specifically the harvesting of Savukku (Casuarina) trees, without any interference.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the lawful owner of an agricultural land situated in Veedur (East) Village, Tindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District, as per a registered settlement deed dated 15.07.2004. Despite this, Respondents 3 to 8 have been continuously attempting to unlawfully encroach upon the said land and obstruct the petitioner from carrying out agricultural activities. When the

petitioner attempted to harvest the matured savukku (casuarina) trees on 20.03.2025 and 21.03.2025, the Respondents 3, 4, 5, and 8 unlawfully intervened and obstructed the process. On 02.01.2025, during a police enquiry, the Respondents 3 to 5 and 8 falsely claimed ownership of the crop and demanded a share of the harvest. The petitioner produced supporting documents, including tax receipts and the VAO's Adangal, proving exclusive possession and cultivation. Despite this, on 17.01.2025, the petitioner was again threatened and intimidated by Respondents 3 to 5. Therefore, the petitioner lodged a complaint before the second respondent, but no effective police protection has been granted till date. Hence, this petition.

3. Heard both sides and perused the material available on record.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that police protection can only be granted to safeguard the life and limb of a person. If there is any obstacle or objection with respect to the petitioner carrying out agricultural activities on the said

property, the petitioner may approach the Civil Court for appropriate relief.

5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. 04.04.2025 : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order shk

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Viluppuram District 605 602.

2.Inspector of Police, Vikravandi Police Station, Viluppuram 605 652.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

shk W.P.No.11949 of 2025 04.04.2025