D.Suresh v. The Superintendent Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR D.Suresh ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police O/o. District Police Office Chengalpet District
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Mamallapuram Chengalpet District
3. The Inspector of Police Sadras Police Station Poonthandalam Chengalpet District
4. Janakiraman ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate police protection for forbearing the 4th respondent to interfere into the petitioner's land comprised in Survey Nos.319/3 and 319/5 situated at Vitilapuram Revenue Village, Thirukalukundram Taluk, Chengalpet District, based on the petitioner's representation dated 18.09.2025 until pending disposal of the proceedings of District Revenue Officer, Chengalpet.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Murugesan For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/4
O R D E R
This Writ Petition (Criminal) has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate police protection forbearing the 4th respondent from interfering into the petitioner's land comprised in Survey Nos.319/3 and 319/5, situated at Vitilapuram Revenue Village, Thirukalukundram Taluk, Chengalpet District, based on the petitioner's representation dated 18.09.2025, until the disposal of the proceedings of District Revenue Officer, Chengalpet.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and also perused the materials available on record.
3. It is seen that this petition has been filed by the petitioner only in order to protect his possession. Such a petition is not maintainable. If his possession is really threatened by any persons, proper remedy is to file a suit for injunction before the competent civil Court and as a matter of right, he cannot seek such an order from this Court. Whether the petitioner is in actual possession or not, is a matter of evidence which has to be seen only by the Civil Court.
4. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this petition. However, if any offence is purported against the petitioner, on complaint, 2/4
let the police enquire the same and if any cognizable offence is made out, the police shall proceed further as per law.
5. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 08.10.2025 ksa-2 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order To 1.The Superintendent of Police O/o. District Police Office Chengalpet District
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Mamallapuram Chengalpet District
3. The Inspector of Police Sadras Police Station Poonthandalam Chengalpet District
4. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras 3/4
N. SATHISH KUMAR , J.
ksa-2 08.10.2025 4/4