Arunadevi v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09.05.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU Arunadevi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. District Superintendent of Police, Nagapattinam District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Sirkazhi Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

3. Anandan ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., pleased to direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to give adequate police protection to the petitioner and her family members as against the 3rd respondent on the basis of petitioner's representation dated 21.03.2024. For Petitioner :

Mr.C.R.Gokulvisvas For R1 & R2 :

Mr.L.Baskaran Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/6

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition is filed for directing the first and second respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 21.03.2024 on the file of respondents 1 and 2 herein and give adequate Police protection to the petitioner.

2. The submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner are as follows :

2.1. The petitioner and her husband cultivated paddy on their land to the extent of 1 acre and 16 cents. Unfortunately, the petitioner's husband fell sick. At that time, the third respondent's father approached them and requested to enter into a lease agreement with him. Later, the 3rd respondent's father using his influence canceled the assignment order and obtained a re-assignment order in favour of his wife. After knowing the same, the petitioner moved an appeal before the Land Commissioner, at Chepauk, Chennai and subsequently filed WP.No.3109 of 2012 to dispose the appeal.

2/6

2.2. The Land Commissioner, conducted enquiry with both parties and by order dated 10.10.2012 cancel the re-assignment order in favour of the 3rd respondent's mother. Later the 3rd respondent moved an appeal before the Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu land reforms against the order passed by the Land Commissioner, Chepauk, Chennai and the same was dismissed on 07.07.2016 and confirmed the order of Land Commissioner, Chepauk, Chennai.

2.3. Therefore, now the petitioner and her family members enjoying the peaceful possession of the land and cultivating paddy till date. Whereas, the 3rd respondent illegally forcing the petitioner to run away from her land and also threatening the petitioner and her daughter. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present Criminal Original Petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the representation of the petitioner dated 21.03.2024 would be considered by the respondent police within a period of two weeks. 3/6

4. I have considered the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent police.

5. Therefore, the respondent police is hereby directed to conduct the enquiry based on the representation of the petitioner, dated 21.03.2024, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

6. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

09.05.2024 Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking drl 4/6

To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the District Superintendent of Police, Nagapattinam District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Sirkazhi Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

5/6

K.KUMARESH BABU drl 09.05.2024 6/6