V.Nehru v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.09.2021 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN V.Nehru ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District.

4.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Uthappanaickanur, Madurai District.

5.Selladurai 6.Chandramohan 7.Aandi 8.Azhagudurai 9.Ravi ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein to do their lawful duty as provided under law by providing appropriate and adequate police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and to erect the boundary stone in S.F.No.338/4A, 4B, 2A1, 2C and 125/2A on the basis of the representation dated 05.08.2019. For Petitioner : No-appearance For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi, Additional Public Prosecutor for RR1 to 4 1/3

O R D E R

This petition has been filed to direct the respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein to do their lawful duty as provided under law by providing appropriate and adequate police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and to erect the boundary stone in S.F.No.338/4A, 4B, 2A1, 2C and 125/2A on the basis of the representation dated 05.08.2019.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he purchased the property situated in S.F.No.338/4A, 4B, 2A1, 2C and 125/2A of Paraipatti Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District on 08.08.1996 from the original owner. Subsequent to that, pattta was also changed in his name and he is in possession and enjoyment of the property. When the petitioner tried to fence his property, the private respondents attempted to trespass into his property. On that basis, a representation was made by the petitioner on 05.08.2019 seeking police protection for erecting boundary stone. Since there was no action, this petition came to be filed.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that on the basis of the representation made by the petitioner, enquiry was undertaken in C.P.No.35 of 2019 and during the course of enquiry, the private respondents have given an undertaking to the effect that they will not make any trouble to the petitioner while surveying the property. On the basis of the undertaking given by the private respondents, the representation made by the petitioner was closed on 27.06.2021.

4. Since the representation made by the petitioner was closed, question of granting police protection does not arise. However, if any trouble arise in future, the petitioner can work out his remedy before the Civil Court.

5. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed as infructuous.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Writs) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) 2/3

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District.

4.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Uthappanaickanur, Madurai District.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.2785 of 2020 Date : 15.09.2021 SA(07.03.2022) 3P 6C 3/3