R.Gobalakrishnan v. The Superintendent Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21-08-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
1. R.Gobalakrishnan S/o.Rangasamypillai, No.11, Bajanai Koil Street, Periyamudaliar Chavady, Kottakuppam Post, Vanur Taluk, Villupuram-605 104.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The Superintendent Of Police 2.Inspector Of Police Kottakuppam Police Station, 3.The Chief Engineer Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.
4.I.Iyanar S/o.Ammavasai, No.13, Tsunami Quarters, Chinnamudharliar Chavady Kuppam, Kottakuppam Post, Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District.
5.GEETHA W/o.Iyyanar, No.13, Tsunami Quarters, Chinnamudharliar Chavady Kuppam, Kottakuppam Post, Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District.
6.S.Lakshmi W/o.Santhosh Kumar, No.11, Tsunami Quarters, Chinnamudharliar Chavady Kuppam, Kottakuppam Post, Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District.
7.NATARAJAN Tsunami Quarters, Chinnamudharliar Chavady Kuppam, Kottakuppam Post, Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District.
8.PREMA W/o.Natarajan, Tsunami Quarters, Chinnamudharliar Chavady Kuppam, Kottakuppam Post, Vanur Taluk, Respondent(s) PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India directing the respondents 1 and 2 to give adequate police protection to the petitioner for constructing the compound wall in the lands comprised in R.S.No. 89/6B2, in Chinnamudalaiar Chavadi Village, Kottakuppam, Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District For Petitioner(s):
T.Sai Krishnan
For Respondent(s):
Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor - R1 to R3
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the first and second respondents to give adequate police protection to the petitioner for constructing the compound wall in his land
2. The case of the petitioner is that when the petitioner attempted to construct a compound wall in his lands in order to prevent the illegal trespass, the respondents 4 to 8 are creating unnecessary ruckus and prevented the petitioner from putting up the compound wall. In this regard, he had also given a complaint before the second respondent. Despite the same, the first and second respondents have not provided any police protection. Hence, the present petition for the aforesaid relief.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 on instructions submitted that as the dispute between the
parties is civil in nature, police protection has not be given and hence, prayed for dismissal of this Writ Petition.
4. At the outset, this Court is of the view, such a protection cannot be granted particularly, when there is rival claim by the other side. The practice of granting blanket police protection particularly, in respect of immovable property without establishing title leads to serious consequences. In this aspect, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ''PR.Muralidharan and others Vs.Swami Dharmananda Theertha Padar'' reported in 2006 4 SCC has held as follows: ''...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 unambigous manner, and then too in furtherance of the decree or order.'' Even as per the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, there is a civil dispute between the parties. In such view of the matter, there shall not be any blanket Order for police protection.
5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. 21-08-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes vrc To 1.The Superintendent Of Police 2.Inspector Of Police Kottakuppam Police Station, 3.The Chief Engineer Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.
N.SATHISH KUMAR J.
vrc 21-08-2025