G.Kanagaraj v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.01.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR G.Kanagaraj, : Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Tiruchirappalli.

2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Musiri Division, Tiruchirappalli.

3. The Inspector of Police, Kattuputhur Police Station, Tiruchirappalli.

4. Durairaj,

5. Karuppannan @ Sekar, : Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying this Court to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to give a police protection for the petitioners life and limb and for construction of house with respect of petitioners property in S.No.245/29 at Unniyur Village, Thottiyam Taluk, 1/5

Trichy District, on the basis of the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.61 of 2007, before the District Munsif Court, Musiri and in A.S.No.133 of 2014, on the file of the learned Additional Sub Judge, Trichy and petitioner's representation, dated 28.11.2022 in accordance with law. For Petitioner : Mr.H.Arumugam For R1 to R3 : Mr.R.Sivakumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to give a police protection for the petitioners life and limb and for construction of house with respect of petitioners property in S.No. 245/29 at Unniyur Village, Thottiyam Taluk, Trichy District. 2.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has filed a civil suit for declaration and for permanent injunction in O.S.Nos.61 of 2007, before the District Munsif Court, Musiri and the fourth respondent has also filed a suit and that the petitioner's suit was dismissed. Challenging the same, the petitioner has preferred an Appeal in A.S.No.133 of 2014 and the Appellate Court has partly allowed the appeal and granted permanent injunction in respect of A-schedule property in favour of the petitioner. He would further submit that when the petitioner making 2/5

constructions in the property, the fourth respondent's wife had trespassed and attacked the petitioner's wife and hence, a criminal case came to be registered. 3.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) would submit that there existed a pathway dispute between the parties and that the third respondent may be directed to consider the representation. 4.Recording the said submission, the third respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 28.11.2022 and pass orders in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5.With the above direction, this criminal original petition is disposed of. 10.01.2023 NCC:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No lr 3/5

To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Tiruchirappalli.

2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Musiri Division, Tiruchirappalli.

3. The Inspector of Police, Kattuputhur Police Station, Tiruchirappalli.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

K.MURALI SHANKAR , J.

lr 10.01.2023 5/5