S.Narayanan v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN S.Narayanan ..Petitioner Vs

1. The State Rep by The Superintendent of Police, Ranipet District.

Ranipet.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Arakkonam, Ranipet District - 631 001.

3. The Inspector of Police Nemili Police Station, Nemili, Ranipet District - 631 051.

4. G.Mari ..Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition (Criminal) filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to give police protection to fence the petitioner's property bearing Survey No.291/2A to an extent of Acre 1 and 52 Centvs at Vepperi Village, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet District.

For Petitioner :

Mr.K.Balaji For Respondents:

Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) for R1 to R3 Mr.G.Murugendran for R4

ORDER

This Writ Petition (Criminal) has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate police protection for the petitioner's property comprised in Survey No.291/2A, measuring an extent of 1 acre 52 cents, situated at Veppari Village, Arakkinam Taluk, Ranipet District. 2.

Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner obtained a Judgement and Decree for partition in O.S.No.13 of 2010 as against the fourth respondent and his family members. Pursuant to the final decree, the petitioner was allotted the subject property and he was also issued patta. While being so, the petitioner was not able to enjoy the fruits of the decree, since the fourth respondent, who is the grandfather of the petitioner, remained in occupation of the subject property. 4.

On instructions, the learned counsel for the fourth respondent submitted that though the subject property was subjected for partition, it was sold out in favour of the third party. Now, the purchaser is in possession and enjoyment of the subject property.

5.

In view of the above, when a civil dispute is pending in respect of the subject property between the fourth respondent and the third-party purchaser, the prayer sought for in this petition to provide adequate police protection cannot be granted. Thus, the writ petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Writ Petition (Criminal) stands dismissed. No costs.

16-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order LPP To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Ranipet District.

Ranipet.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Arakkonam, Ranipet District - 631 001.

3. The Inspector of Police Nemili Police Station, Nemili, Ranipet District - 631 051.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN J.

LPP 16-06-2026