S. Elumalai v. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.03.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR W.P. Crl. No. 647 of 2026 and WPMP. Crl. Nos. 207 & 208 of 2026 1.S. Elumalai 2.E. Devi ... Petitioners Vs.
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvannamalai, Thiruvannamalai District - 606 601.
2.The Inspector of Police, Thachampattu Police Station, Thachampattu - 606 811, Thiruvannamalai Taluk & District.
3.Renugambal 4.Kowsalya 5.K. Sinthanai Selvan ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to provide adequate police protection to the petitioners and their family members and their properties land and house situated in old S.No.1/6, new S.No.1/11 and 1/16, Allikondapattu Village, Thiruvannamalai District on the 1/6
basis of the complaint lodged by the petitioners on 12.02.2026. For Petitioners : Mr. C. Prakasam For Respondents: Mr. Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 & R2
O R D E R
This Writ Petition (Criminal) has been filed seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to provide adequate police protection to the petitioners, their family members and their properties, namely the land and house situated in old S.No.1/6, new S.Nos.1/11 and 1/16 at Allikondapattu Village, Thiruvannamalai District, based on the complaint lodged by the petitioners on 11.02.2026.
2. The petitioners are husband and wife. The 2nd petitioner had submitted a representation on 11.02.2022 to the 2nd respondent police, making specific complaints against one Sinthanai Selvan, Renugambal and Kowsalya. It is submitted that the 2nd petitioner's father-in-law, Subba Reddy, was married to Visalatchi and her husband Elumalai is their only son. The said Subba Reddy had an extramarital affair with one Renugambal, which resulted in matrimonial discord between the 2nd petitioner's motherin-law and father-in-law. 2/6
2.1. There was also a civil suit in O.S.No.234 of 1979, wherein the suit was decreed in favour of the 2nd petitioner's mother-in-law in respect of the property in S.No.1/6 (New No.1/11, 1/16), measuring 32 cents, which was granted for her maintenance. Thereafter, 2nd petitioner's father-in-law filed a civil suit in O.S.No.11 of 2011, which was also decided in favour of the 2nd petitioner's mother-in-law. Subsequently, another suit in O.S.No.271 of 2019 was filed by Sathiyaseelan and his mother, Renugambal. 2.2. Using the said suit, the said Renugambal engaged Sinthanai Selvan, who, taking advantage of his social status as Scheduled Caste (SC), lodged a false complaint against the petitioners. 2.3.
The said Sinthanai Selvan had been continuously harassing and obstructing the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property by the petitioners and their daughters. There have been frequent inclusion by the said Sinthanai Selvan. At his instance, unknown persons have been visiting the petitioners' house at odd hours. Several complaints have been lodged and CCTV recordings showing the movement of such persons have also been submitted to the police. However, no action has been taken. 2.4.
enjoyment of the property by the petitioners. Despite the same, the said Sinthanai Selvan, along with his associates, damaged the petitioners' house, broke open the door and is now forcibly putting up construction, claiming to have obtained a lease over the property from one Renugambal. 2.5. There is no record or document to substantiate any such right. However, the respondent police, for reasons best known to them, have not taken any action against Sinthanai Selvan, Renugambal and Kowsalya, which has emboldened them to attempt to dispossess the petitioners and their family members from the property. Left with no other option, the present petition has been filed.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners had also produced the photographs showing unauthorized and illegal construction activities carried out by the said persons in the petitioners' house.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that, on the petitioners' complaint, both the petitioners as well as the rival parties including Sinthanai Selvan, Renukaambal and Kowsalya, would be called for enquiry. It was further 4/6
submitted that if it is found that any such illegal intrusion or obstruction to the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property by the petitioners has occurred without any supporting documents, appropriate action would be taken and if necessary, coercive action would also be initiated.
5. Recording the same, this Writ Petition (Criminal) is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs. 25.03.2026 AT To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvannamalai, Thiruvannamalai District - 606 601.
2.The Inspector of Police, Thachampattu Police Station, Thachampattu - 606 811, Thiruvannamalai Taluk & District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
5/6
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
AT W.P. Crl. No. 647 of 2026 and WPMP. Crl. Nos. 207 & 208 of 2026 25.03.2026 6/6