Madras High CourtWP Crl./778/2026disposed of

K. Senthilkumar v. The Superintendent Of Police

2026-06-03Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN and WPMP.Crl.No.254 of 2026 K. Senthilkumar S/o. Kaliaperumal, No.23, Sudarsanam Street, Manjakuppam, Cuddalore-607001.

..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police (Armed Reserve), Cuddalore-607 001.

3. Mr. Balu S/o. R.T. Rajan, 32, Anna Nagar, Cuddalore-607 001.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 from intimidating the petitioner in respect of his business of providing Cable TV Connections to the existing or new customers to houses in "108 Quarters" Pudukuppam, Cuddalore Town, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District and Pass such other orders as are deemed fit and thus render justice and pass such other orders as are deemed fit and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr. E. Ashok Kumar For Respondent(s):

Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for R1 And R2

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 from intimidating the petitioner in respect of his business of providing Cable TV Connections to the existing as well as new customers in "108 Quarters" Pudukuppam, Cuddalore Town, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District.

2. It is seen from the records that there is a dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent, as well as his brother, in respect of Cable TV connections. According to the petitioner, at the instigation of the third respondent, the second respondent is intimidating the petitioner. It is further submitted that a suit for declaration had been filed between the petitioner and brother of the third respondent, and the same was subsequently closed on account of a compromise arrived at between the parties.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, submitted that no complaint is pending either against the petitioner or the third respondent. It is further submitted that

the respondents 1 and 2 would not interfere with the lawful business activities carried on by the petitioner.

4. Recording the said submission, the respondents 1 and 2 are directed not to interfere in the civil dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent and shall not interfere with the lawful business activities of the petitioner, except in accordance with law.

5. With the above direction, this writ petition (criminal) is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 03-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order av To

1. The Superintendent of Police Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police (Armed Reserve), Cuddalore-607 001.

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

av 03-06-2026