← Library
Madras High CourtWP/25026/2024dismissed

E.Lakshmi v. The Superintendent Of Police

2025-09-01Honourable Mr Justice N. Sathish Kumar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 01.09.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR E.Lakshmi ... Petitioner

Versus

1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, District Police office, Tiruvannamalai Taluk & District. Pin Code- 606604.

2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, Camp Office (Town) Tiruvannamalai Taluk & District. Pin Code-606604.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, Kilpennathur Police station, Kilpennathur Town & Taluk, Tiruvannamalai Taluk & District. Pin Code- 606601.

4.Palani .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioner representation letter dated 03.08.2024 and it was 3rd respondent was to render police protection to fence the Petitioner property in Survey No 614 /32, 6U /33, 202/38, with Rajaji street, Kilpennathur Town & Taluk, Tiruvannamalai and such further or other orders as this Court may deem to be fit an extent 1668 square feet situated.

For Petitioner : Mr.Pari Gopal (No appearance) For Respondents : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan for R1 to R3 Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.B.Devakumar for R4

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed directing the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioner representation letter dated 03.08.2024 and it was 3rd respondent was to render police protection to fence the Petitioner property in Survey No 614 /32, 6U /33, 202/38, with Rajaji street, Kilpennathur Town & Taluk, Tiruvannamalai and such further or other orders as this Court may deem to be fit an extent 1668 square feet situated.

2. None appeared for the petitioner. I have perused the materials placed on record. At the out set, this Court is unable to comprehend as to how this writ petition is maintainable. If at all the petitioner has any dispute with regard to measurement and survey of the land, the proper course is to approach Civil Court by making the respondents as a necessary party and to appoint an Advocate Commissioner, without resorting the same, as a blanket order police protection cannot be granted. In this regard, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment of P.R.Muralidharan and others Vs. Swami Dharmananda Theertha Padar and others reported in (2006) 4 SCC 501 has held that what are all the matters for which police protection can be granted. For better appreciation, the relevant portion of the judgment is extracted below:

"...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 unambiguous manner, and then too in furtherance of the decree or order."

4. In view of the above, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 01.09.2025 dhk Index :Yes/No Internet:Yes/No To

1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, District Police office, Tiruvannamalai Taluk & District. Pin Code- 606604.

2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, Camp Office (Town) Tiruvannamalai Taluk & District. Pin Code-606604.

3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, Kilpennathur Police station, Kilpennathur Town & Taluk, Tiruvannamalai Taluk & District. Pin Code- 606601.

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

dhk

01.09.2024