← Library
Madras High CourtWP/35350/2024dismissed

Saravanan v. The State Rep By

2024-11-25Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.11.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Saravanan ... Petitioner versus 1.The State represented by The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home Department, Fort St. George, Chennai.

2.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Villlupuram District.

3.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Kalakurichi District.

4.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police Villupuram District.

5.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, 6.The Inspector of Police, Arakandanallur police Station, Villupuram District.

Pg.Nos.1/4

7.The Inspector of Police, Thirukovilur Police Station, 8.T.G.Ganesh ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 4 to 7 to provide protection to the petitioner's life and property on the hands of the 8th respondent and his henchmen.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Kingston Jerold For Respondents :

Mr.S.Sugendran Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

The case of the petitioner is that he entered into a sale agreement with the eighth respondent on 21.02.2024 for a total amount of Rs. 48,00,000/-, with an advance payment of Rs.10,00,000/-. After being denied a passage right through an adjacent property, the eighth respondent forcibly detained the petitioner and his brother in his house on 30/09/2024, threatening them with weapons and demanding the return of the advance along with 50% monthly interest. The eighth respondent also forced the petitioner to execute the sale deed without receiving the balance payment. Despite filing complaints with respondents 4 to 7, no action has been taken, citing jurisdictional issues. As a Pg.Nos.2/4

result, the petitioner fears for the safety of himself and his family, and seeks police protection.

2. The dispute between the petitioner and the eighth respondent appears to be primarily related to a financial transaction and the terms of a sale agreement, which are civil matters. Although the petitioner has attempted to give a criminal colour to the issue, the core matter involves a breach of contract and monetary claims, which should be resolved in a civil court. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought in this writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to seek his legal remedy in the manner known to law through the appropriate forum. 25.11.2024 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No r n s Pg.Nos.3/4

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

r n s To 1.The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home Department, Fort St. George, Chennai.

2.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Villlupuram District.

3.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Kalakurichi District.

4.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police Villupuram District.

5.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, 6.The Inspector of Police, Arakandanallur police Station, Villupuram District.

7.The Inspector of Police, Thirukovilur Police Station, 8.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

25.11.2024 Pg.Nos.4/4