Murali Gopal v. The State

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN W.P.No.12369 of 2025 Murali Gopal ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The State, Rep. by Inspector of Police, Roshanai Police Station, Tindivanam.

2.Kalaivanan ... 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 respondent to provide police aid so as to enable the petitioner to put up a compound wall to protect and preserve his lands in Old Survey No.171/1 and 171/2 and New Survey No.41/5, measuring an extent of Acre 1 and 27 cents in Salavathy Village, Tindivanam Taluk, so as to secure electricity connection.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Thiagarajan

For R1 : Mr.R.Vinothraja, Government Advocate (crl.side) For R2 : Mr.R.Marudha Chalamurthy

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the first respondent to provide police aid to enable the petitioner to construct a compound wall for the protection and preservation of his lands in Old Survey Nos. 171/1 and 171/2, and New Survey No. 41/5, measuring an extent of 1 acre and 27 cents in Salavathy Village, Tindivanam Taluk, so as to secure an electricity connection.

2. The petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the property comprising Old Survey Nos. 171/1 and 171/2 and New Survey No. 41/5, measuring an extent of 1 acre and 27 cents in Salavathy Village, Tindivanam Taluk. While in such possession, the second respondent, without any right, title, or interest, attempted to interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession and claimed title over the property. This led the petitioner to file a civil suit in O.S. No. 190 of 2010 before the

Additional District Munsif Court, Tindivanam, seeking a declaration of title and permanent injunction. The suit was partly decreed in the petitioner's favor on 23.08.2022. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal in A.S. No. 37 of 2022 before the learned Principal Sub-Judge, Tindivanam. The appeal was allowed on 28.11.2024, granting the petitioner a declaration of title and a permanent injunction. Despite the decree, the second respondent continued to attempt trespass and interfere with the petitioner's possession, which led the petitioner to make repeated requests for police protection. However, the interference continued unabated.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that, with regard to the land dispute, the matter has been referred to the Tahsildar, Tindivanam, for appropriate action.

4. Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that police protection can only be granted to safeguard a

person's life and limb. In the event of any obstruction or objection while constructing the compound wall around the petitioner's property, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Civil Court for appropriate relief.

6. In view of the above, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

07.04.2025 : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order shk To 1.The Inspector of Police,

Roshanai Police Station, Tindivanam.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

shk

W.P.No.12369 of 2025 07.04.2025