Mr.R.Radha Krishnan v. The State Rep. By Its

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.01.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH Crl.O.P.No.25357 of 2015 R.Radha Krishnan ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State rep. By its Inspector of Police, Cheyyar Police Station, Cheyyar Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District.

2. A. Marimuthu

3. R.Ganga ... Respondents Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to provide necessary police protection to the petitioner to put up the fencing compound wall in the land of 360 sq.ft. which is situated behind the petitioner's own house at No.58/35, Nehru Street, (Periya Kavarai Street), Cheyyar Town - 604407, Cheyyar Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Nandakumar For Respondents : Mr.C.Emalias, Additional Public Prosecutor for R1.

O R D E R

This petition has been filed to provide necessary police protection to the petitioner to put up the fencing compound wall in the land of 360 sq.ft. which is situated behind the petitioner's own house at No.58/35, Nehru Street, (Periya Kavarai Street), Cheyyar Town - 604407, Cheyyar Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District.

2. In the petition, the petitioner has stated that he is the owner of the land measuring 360 sq.ft. which is situated behind his own house at No.58/35, Nehru street, (Periya Kavarai street), Cheyyar Town - 604407, Cheyyar taluk, Tiruvannamalai District. The 2nd and 3rd respondents are making hindrance for more than 2

decades. Hence, the petitioner filed a suit against the 2nd and 3rd respondent in O.S.No.382 of 1992 before the District Munsif at Cheyyar and the same was allowed and the petitioner was declared as the absolute owner of the said property. .The 2nd and 3rd respondents preferred an Appeal and Civil Revision Petition before this Court against the order made in the suit and the applications and petitions filed by them were dismissed. Inspite of the same, the 2nd and 3rd respondents are making hindrance to the petitioner. Now, the petitioner wanted to construct a compound wall in the said land but the 2nd and 3rd respondents are preventing him from doing so. Hence, he preferred a complaint before the respondent police. Since no action was taken, he has come forward with the present petition to provide police protection for putting up compound wall in the land.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

4. Considering the submissions made on either side, this Court directs the petitioner to give a fresh representation for police protection along with a copy of this order to the respondent police within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondent police is directed to pass appropriate order with regard to providing police protection, enabling the petitioner to construct the compound wall in the above referred land, after affording personal hearing to the petitioner as well as the parties concerned within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of representation from the petitioner.

5. The criminal original petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS II ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar vsi To

1. The Inspector of Police, Cheyyar Police Station, Cheyyar Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

1 cc to M/s. R. Nandakumar, Advocate, Sr. 1551 Crl.O.P.No.25357 of 2015 MP (CO) kk 27/1