E.Lakshmanan, Aged 38 Years v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 27.09.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH CRL.OP.No.21877 of 2016 E.Lakshmanan

...Petitioner

vs.

1. The Superintendent of Police District Police Officer, Thiruvannamalai Taluk & District.

2.The Inspector of Police Arani Taluk Police Station, Tiruvannamalai Taluk & District.

...Respondents

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., pleased to direct the respondent to give police protection to the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.Parigopal For Respondents : Mr.B.Ramesh Babu, Govt.Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This petition has been filed to direct the respondent to give police protection to the petitioner.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondents.

3. On a reading of the petition it appears that dispute between the petitioner and the opposite party is civil in nature and therefore, no direction can be issued for police protection as prayed for by the petitioner in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court State of Punjab Vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullan (2011) 14 SCC 770.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. Hence this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law. Civil forum.

-sd/- Assistant Registrar / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar dpq To

1. The Superintendent of Police District Police Officer, Thiruvannamalai Taluk & District.

2.The Inspector of Police Arani Taluk Police Station, Tiruvannamalai Taluk & District.

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

+1 cc to MR.PARIGOPAL,Advocate SR.NO. 55753 CRL.OP.No.21877 of 2016 lrs[co] RD 22/10/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/