D.Ramachandiran v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR W.P. No.17124 of 2023 D.Ramachandiran ... Petitioner

Versus

1.The Superintendent of Police Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police Pargur, Krishnagiri District 3.The Inspector of Police Kandhikuppam Police Station Krishnagiri District 4.Panchali .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to gave a police protection to fencing and Installation of bricks in the petitioners land in Patta No. 2727, Survey No.255/2D extent of 0.20 cent, Orappam Village, Pargur Union and Taluk Krishnagiri District by considering the petitioners representation dated 15.03.2023.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Punniakoti For Respondents : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan for R1 to R3 Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed seeking to direct the 3rd respondent to gave a police protection to fencing and Installation of bricks in the petitioners land in Patta No. 2727, Survey No.255/2D extent of 0.20 cent, Orappam Village, Pargur Union and Taluk Krishnagiri District by considering the petitioners representation dated 15.03.2023.

2. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the fourth respondent is continuously preventing the petitioner from installing the bricks. Hence, the petition.

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

4. At the out set, this Court is unable to countenance the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. If at all the petitioner has any dispute with regard to measurement and survey of the land, the proper course is to approach Civil Court by making the respondents as a necessary party or to appoint an Advocate Commissioner, without resorting the same, as a blanket order police protection cannot be granted. In this regard, the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment of P.R.Muralidharan and others Vs. Swami Dharmananda Theertha Padar and others reported in (2006) 4 SCC 501 has held that what are all the matters for which police protection can be granted. For better appreciation, the relevant portion of the judgment is extracted below:

"...19. A writ for "police protection" so-called, has only a limited scope, as, when the court is approached for protection of rights declared by a decree or by an order passed by a civil court. It cannot be extended to cases where rights have not been determined either finally by the civil court or, at least at an interlocutory stage in an unambiguous manner, and then too in furtherance of the decree or order."

5. In view of the above, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 18.08.2025 dhk Index :Yes/No Internet:Yes/No N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

dhk To 1.The Superintendent of Police Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police Pargur, Krishnagiri District 3.The Inspector of Police Kandhikuppam Police Station Krishnagiri District W.P. No.17124 of 2023 18.08.2025