K.S.Balasubramaniyam v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 22.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN K.S.Balasubaramaniyam ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Coimbatore, Coimbatore District.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Periyanaikanpalayam, Coimbatore, Coimbatore District.

3. The Inspector of Police, Karamadai Police Station, Karamadai, Mettupalayam Taluk, Coimbatore District.

4. Lakshmi

5. AX Gilmore ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first to third respondents to give police protection to the petitioner for cultivating the property admeasuring 1/5

7.59 acres comprised in S.No.109/1, 0.09 acres comprised in S.No.1.9/3, 0.30 acres comprised in S.No.110/1, 1.48 acres comprised in S.No.110/2, 0.09 acres comprised in S.No.110/3 situated at Kalampalaym Village, Mettupalayam Taluk, Coimbatore District.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Rajarajan For Respondents : Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 to R3

O R D E R

With consent of both sides, this Writ Petition has been taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the first to third respondents to give police protection to the petitioner for cultivating his property.

3. On a perusal of the records, it is revealed that the petitioner owned the properties admeasuring 7.59 acres comprised in S.No.109/1, 0.09 acres comprised in S.No.109/3, 0.30 acres comprised in S.No.110/1, 1.48 2/5

acres comprised in S.No.110/2, 0.09 acres comprised in S.No.110/3 situated at Kalampalayam Village, Mettupalayam Taluk, Coimbatore District. While the petitioner was cultivating the said properties, the fourth and fifth respondents obstructed the same. In order to cultivate the properties, police protection cannot be considered, since the entire dispute between the petitioner and the fourth and fifth respondents is civil in nature. Therefore, the petitioner ought to have approached the civil Court for appropriate relief. That apart, on the complaint lodged by the petitioner, the third respondent already conducted an enquiry and the same was closed as civil in nature. Therefore, the direction sought in this Writ Petition cannot be considered, and it is liable to be dismissed.

4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 22.04.2025 Index:Yes/No kv 3/5

To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Coimbatore, Coimbatore District.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Periyanaikanpalayam, Coimbatore, Coimbatore District.

3. The Inspector of Police, Karamadai Police Station, Karamadai, Mettupalayam Taluk, Coimbatore District.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

4/5

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

kv 22.04.2025 5/5