M.Saraswathi v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 01-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN M.Saraswathi W/o Mathivanan, No.7/1063, Periyar Nagar, Kaatukottai Post, Thalaivasal Taluk, Salem.

..Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police Salem.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Attur Taluk, Salem.

3. The Inspector of Police Attur Rural Police Station, Salem.

4. M.Senthil S/o Mohan, D.No.704, Ayarpadi, Kaatukottai Village, Attur Taluk, Salem.

..Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition (Criminal) filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 namely the police authorities to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner to enable her to peacefully draw and utilize water from the well situated in the C-Schedule property for irrigating her agricultural land in the B-Schedule

property, in accordance with the rights conferred under the registered partition deed dated 02.07.2012 by disposing of the petitioner's representation dated 23.03.2026.

For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Sudhan For Respondents:

Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) for R1 to R3.

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner to draw and utilise water from the well situated in the "C" Schedule property, for the purpose of irrigating her agricultural land in the "B" Schedule property, in terms of the Partition Deed dated 02.07.2012.

2.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. Perused the materials available on record. 3.

It is seen that the petitioner and her brother had partitioned the subject property by way of a registered partition deed dated 02.07.2012. Subsequently, the share allotted to the petitioner's brother was sold to the fourth respondent. Now, a dispute has arisen between the petitioner and the fourth respondent in respect of drawing water from the common well. Since the

dispute is civil in nature, the petitioner ought to have approached the competent Civil Court for appropriate relief for drawing water.

4. In view of the above, the representation submitted by the petitioner seeking police protection cannot be considered. Thus, the writ petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Civil Court for appropriate relief. No costs. 01-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order LPP To

1. The Superintendent of Police Salem.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Attur Taluk, Salem.

3. The Inspector Of Police Attur Rural Police Station, Salem.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN J.

LPP 01-06-2026