Madras High CourtWP Crl./317/2025dismissed

G.C.Ramasamy v. The Superintendent Of Police

2025-09-10Honourable Mr Justice N. Sathish Kumar5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

1. G.C.Ramasamy S/o. Chinnappa, D.No.3/106, Govinda Agraharam Village, Begapali Post, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

Appellant(s) Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

2.The Inspector of Police SIPCOT Police Station, Hosur Taluk, 3.The Thasildar Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

4.Munusamy S/o.(Late) Abbaiah, Govinda Agraharam Village, Hosur Taluk, 5.Raja

S/o. Munusamy, Govinda Agraharam Village and Post, Hosur Taluk, Respondent(s) PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the 2nd respondent to provide police protection to the petitioner and his men for fencing the property situated at Govinda Agraharam Village, Begampalli Panchayat union Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District, bearing Survey No.45/8 on the basis of the complaint representation given by the petitioner to the respondents 1 to 3 dated 19.04.2025 and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondent : Mr.K.M.D. Muhilan, APP For R1 to R3

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed seeking to direct the 2nd respondent to provide police protection to the petitioner and his men for fencing the property situated at Govinda Agraharam Village, Begampalli Panchayat union Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District, bearing Survey No.45/8 on the basis of the complaint representation given by the petitioner to the respondents 1 to 3 dated 19.04.2025.

2. Heard the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police.

3. 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 as 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.'' It is seen that there is a civil dispute between the petitioner and private respondents and it is seen from the petition that already a suit for partition has also been filed. In such view of the matter, there shall not be any blanket Order for police protection.

4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. msr 10-09-2025 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes To 1.The Superintendent of Police Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

2.The Inspector of Police SIPCOT Police Station, Hosur Taluk, 3.The Thasildar Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

N.SATHISH KUMAR J.

msr 10-09-2025