G.Hepzibah Jackuline v. The Superintendent Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.08.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR W.P.(Crl.)No.609 of 2025 G.Hepzibah Jackuline ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. The Superintendent of Police, Erode District, Erode.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bhavani, Erode District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Bargur Police Station, Anthiyur Taluk, Erode District.

4.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Anthiyur Taluk, Bhavani Sub-Division, Erode District.

5.The Taluk Surveyor, Anthiyur Taluk, Erode District.

6.P.C.Murugan @ Murgathampadi ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to grant police protection to survey the land in Survey No.424/2, to an extent of Hec 0.20.25 of Acre 0.50 Cents at Bargur Villge, Anthiyur Taluk, Erode District, by the 5th respondent.

For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Baskar For R1 to R5 :

Mr.R.Vinothraja, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R6 :

Mr.P.Sesubalan Raja

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to grant police protection to survey the land in Survey No.424/2, to an extent of Hec 0.20.25 of Acre 0.50 Cents at Bargur Villge, Anthiyur Taluk, Erode District, by the 5th respondent.

2.It is the case of the petitioner that he is the absolute owner of the subject property. The 6th respondent, who is the adjacent land owner and vendor of the petitioner, disputed the boundaries of the land on the ground that his sister has filed a partition suit in O.S.No.340 of 2019 which is pending trial. The petitioner is not a party to the suit. Though the petitioner approached the Revenue authorities for surveying the land and fixing the boundaries, survey could not be conducted based on the objections of the 6th respondent. Therefore, the petitioner seeks police protection for surveying the land and fixing the boundaries. 3.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials on record.

4.At the outset, this Court is of the view that the allegations made out by the petitioner prima facie appear to be purely civil in nature. The practice of granting blanket orders of police protection, particularly in

respect of civil disputes, would lead to serious consequences. In this aspect, the Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of PR.Muralidharan and others v. Swami Dharmananda Theertha Padar reported in 2006 (4) SCC 501, 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 unambiguous manner, and then too in furtherance of the decree or order."

5.If at all there is any obstruction on the side of the 6th respondent, nothing prevented the petitioner from approaching the Civil Court by filing a suit against him and seek for an injunction or he can very well implead himself in the pending suit and obtain necessary orders. However, there cannot not be any blanket order for police protection. Hence, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. 6.When this Court was about to dismiss this writ petition on merits,

the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition. He has also made an endorsement to that effect. In view of the same, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. 19.08.2025 mkn Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No Speaking order : Yes / No To 1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. The Superintendent of Police, Erode District, Erode.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bhavani, Erode District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Bargur Police Station, Anthiyur Taluk, Erode District.

4.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Anthiyur Taluk, Bhavani Sub-Division, Erode District.

5.The Taluk Surveyor, Anthiyur Taluk, Erode District.

6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

mkn W.P.(Crl.)No.609 of 2025

19.08.2025