← Library
Madras High CourtWP Crl./1433/2025disposed of

T.Dhandapani v. The State By, The Inspector Of Police,

2026-06-04Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN T.Dhandapani ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1.The State rep by, The Inspector of Police, Sulthanpet Police Station, Sulthanpet, Coimbatore.

2.P.Ramasamy 3.R.Vairamani ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent police to give police protection to the petitioner by considering the petitioner's complaint dated 08.10.2025. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.G.Prabhakar For Respondent(s):

Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar, GA(Crl.Side) for R1

ORDER

By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

2. This petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent police to give police protection to the petitioner by considering the petitioner's complaint dated 08.10.2025. 3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent and perused the materials available on record.

4.The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of land situated in S.No.459/1 measuring an extent of 9.04 acres, while the 2nd respondent, who is the adjacent owner to the petitioner, had trespassed into the petitioner's land and encroached and caused damage to the boundary stone and when the petitioner questioned the same, he was threatened with dire consequences and also abused him in filthy language and in this regard, he loaded a police complaint vide CSR No.511/2023. The petitioner also filed a civil suit in O.S.No.144 of 2023 and according to the petitioner, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed and he filed a report, wherein, the petitioner's property was clearly earmarked with boundaries and the 2nd and 3rd respondents have also accepted and assured that they would not disturb or encroach upon the property of the petitioner, however, when the petitioner was intending to construct a motor room, the 2nd and 3rd respondents once interfered and caused nuisance and disturbed the possession of

the petitioner, which prompted the petitioner once again to lodge a police complaint vide CSR No.353 of 2024. It is further case of the petitioner that based on the Taluk Surveyor's report, he decided to put wire fencing around his property, however, the 2nd and 3rd respondents once again interfered with and disturbed his possession, which prompted the petitioner to lodge a complaint dated 08.10.2025 seeking to give police protection and to take appropriate action. Since no action is forthcoming by the first respondent, the petitioner was constrained to file the present writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if this Court issues a direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's complaint dated 08.10.2025 and pass orders.

6. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent would submit that the petitioner's complaint will be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a reasonable time.

7. In view of the above submission, without going into the merits of the writ petition, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the first respondent to conduct an enquiry on the complaint dated 08.10.2025 lodged by the petitioner and pass orders on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of

four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after issuing due notice to the 2nd and 3rd respondents herein.

8. It is made clear that if no complaint is received by the first respondent, the petitioner is at liberty to lodge a fresh complaint on fresh cause of action. On receipt of the same, the first respondent is directed to conduct due enquiry and pass orders on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks therein, after issuing due notice to the 2nd and 3rd respondents herein.

9. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 04-06-2026 DN To

1. The Inspector of Police, Sulthanpet Police Station, Sulthanpet, Coimbatore.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN J.

DN 04-06-2026