Praveen Kumar v. The Commissioner Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR Praveen Kumar S/o. Narasimhulu Appellant(s) Vs

1. The Commissioner of Police Tambaram City Police, Tambaram.

2.The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Pallikarani Police District, Pallikarani.

3.The Inspector of Police, T-12, Selaiyur Police Station, Selaiyur.

4.Srinivasan S/o. Ravichandran Respondent(s) PRAYER This Writ Petition has been file under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to provide 1 / 6

sufficient police protection to the petitioner from the 4th respondent and his men to lay the compound wall around the petitioner's land based on representation of the petitioner dated 29.08.2025. For Petitioner Mr. D.Ashokkumar For Respondent:

Mr. R.Vinothraja, Govt. Advocate (crl.side) for R1 to R3

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to provide police protection to construct a compound wall.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and perused the materials available on record.

2 / 6

3. At the outset, this Court is of the considered view that such a protection cannot be granted, particularly, when there exists a 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.

4. 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.'' 3 / 6

5. Even as per the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the fourth respondent is preventing the petitioner from putting up a compound wall. When such an allegation discloses that the issue is essentially a civil dispute, and if the petitioner claims to be the absolute owner of the property, it is open to him to approach the competent civil court and seek an injunction.

6. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that there cannot be a blanket order for police protection in the present case.

7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition (criminal) is dismissed. 17-09-2025 mrp 4 / 6

To 1.The Commissioner of Police Tambaram City Police, Tambaram.

2.The Deputy Commissioner of Police Pallikarani Police Station, Pallikarani.

3.The Inspector of Police T-12, Selaiyur Police Station, Selaiyur.

5 / 6

N.SATHISH KUMAR J.

mrp 17-09-2025 6 / 6