Selvaraj v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 05/02/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L. VICTORIA GOWRI S.Selvaraj ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep By, The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Chinnalapatti Police Station, Dindigul District.

3. Senthilarasu ... Respondents PRAYER :- To direct the respondents No.1 and 2 to accord police protection to the petitioner's right of accessing the pathway based on the petitioner's representation dated 16.12.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.Anand R., Advocate For Respondent : M/s.M.Sakthi kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/6

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition is filed to direct the respondents No.1 and 2 to accord police protection to the petitioner's right of accessing the pathway based on the petitioner's representation dated 16.12.2025.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the third respondent is continuously hindering his pathway and creating great inconvenience to the petitioner from enjoying the peaceful possession and access to pathway situated in survey No.190/6. He further pointed out that with regard to the pathway dispute between him and the third respondent, he had already filed a civil suit in O.S.No.1 of 2014 and had got a decree of injunction in his favour before the learned District Munsif, Dindigul on 3/3/2018, against which the third respondent had preferred an appeal in A.S.No.54 of 2018 which was dismissed by the Appellate Court on 28/7/2023. Thereafter having not preferred a second appeal as against the same, now the third respondent is continuously causing obstruction and interfering with the peaceful possession and 2/6

access to the pathway in survey number No.190/6 and sought for indulgence of this Court in directing the second respondent police to give appropriate protection to remove the obstruction which has been caused by the 3rd respondent in the said pathway.

3. Per contra, the learned Government advocate submitted that there is no evidence for the petitioner's contention that the pathway is obstructed and also as to the existence of pathway at all and submitted that the police has only limited powers to meddle in civil disputes.

4. Heard either sides and carefully perused the materials available on record.

5. Considering the limited scope of the relief sought for, notice to the third respondent is dispensed with.

6. In view of the submission made by the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that already he holds a civil court decree in his favour, the second respondent police is directed to put the third respondent on notice 3/6

and the petitioner is also directed to produce all the documents and the copy of the decree in his favour before the second respondent police and after perusing the same, if substance is found to be available on the submission made by the petitioner, the second respondent police is directed to afford appropriate police protection to remove the obstructions, if any, found in the said pathway on paying payment of necessary fee to the police in terms of G.O.Ms.No.139 Home(Pol.VIII) Department dated 04.03.2019.

7. With the above observation, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

05.02.2026 NCC : yes / no Index : yes / no Internet : yes / no pnn 4/6

To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Chinnalapatti Police Station, Dindigul District.

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

5/6

L. VICTORIA GOWRI,J pnn

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.2250 of 2026 Date : 05/02/2026 6/6