Pandiselvi v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.02.2025 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Pandiselvi ... Petitioner Vs
1. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.
2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thirumangalam Sub Division, Madurai District.
3. The Inspector of Police, Kallikkudi Police Station, Madurai District.
4. Kannatthal
5. Sureshkumar
6. Amudha ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent No. 1 to 3 to provide police protection to the petitioner and 1/6
petitioner family members by considering the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 18.12.2024 in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Dr.R.Alagumani, For R1 to R3 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to provide police protection to the petitioner and her family members by considering the petitioner's representation dated 18.12.2024.
2.The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the owner of the property in S.F.No.87/17 in T.Arrasapaitti, Kallikudi Taluk, Madurai District to an extent of 13 cents. Thereafter, she executed deed in favour of her daughter in respect of 8 cents and the remaining five cents belongs to her and the same was sub divided as S.F.No.87/17 A1. Already the property was surveyed and the Survey 2/6
Officials also laid boundary stones. While so, the respondents 4 to 6, who are the adjacent land owners, illegally removed the boundary stones and thereafter, when the petitioner tried to lay boundary stones and erect fence on 24.11.2024, the respondents 4 to 6 prevented her from laying the stones and erecting fence. Therefore, a complaint has been lodged on 25.04.2024 and C.S.R.No.510 of 2024 was assigned and thereafter, no action was taken. Again on 18.12.2024, the petitioner sent a representation to the respondents 1 to 3 for taking appropriate steps and to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner for setting up fence and the same was not considered. Hence this petition has been filed.
3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that already the petitioner has lodged a complaint dated 29.11.2024 and C.S.R.No.510 of 2024 was assigned. During enquiry, the parties agreed to settle the issue before the competent civil Court and therefore, the C.S.R.No.510 of 2024 was closed. Thereafter, again the petitioner has lodged the present complaint, which will be enquired and disposed of within a week. 3/6
4. Considering the limited scope of prayer sought for in this petition, this Court, even without issuing notice to the private respondents, is inclined to dispose of this petition. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor also admitted the receipt of the petitioner's representation, dated 18.12.2024 and assured to complete the enquiry within a period of one week.
5.Therefore, this Court directs the third respondent to complete the enquiry and dispose of the petitioner's representation, dated 18.12.2024, within a period of one week from the date of this order, in accordance with law on merits.
6.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 19.02.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR 4/6
To
1. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.
2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thirumangalam Sub Division, Madurai District.
3. The Inspector of Police, Kallikkudi Police Station, Madurai District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
P.DHANABAL , J.
LR 19.02.2025 6/6