K.Ramachandran v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :24.02.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL K.Ramachandran ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Tiruchuli Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

3. Irulan ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to direct the 2nd respondent to give a police protection for the petitioner's life and limb based on the representation given by the petitioner dated 06.02.2025. For Petitioner : M.Ganesan For R1 & R2 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R3 : Mr.P.Manoharan 1/5

ORDER

This petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the 2nd respondent to give police protection to the petitioner's life and limb based on the representation given by the petitioner dated 06.02.2025.

2. According to the petitioner, he is the owner of the property in Survey No.81 / 31 through the proceedings of the Revenue Thasildar dated 29.02.2007 and he also got patta. While so, he temporarily moved to Madurai and residing there, and later, he came to understand that the 3rd respondent is trying to grab the property and also approached the Revenue Authorities. On 01.02.2025, the Survey Department issued notice to the aggrieved parties and the property was surveyed. The petitioner has also sent a detailed representation dated 06.02.2025 to the respondents no. 1 and 2 to give police protection for fencing the property, but the same has not been considered by the police. Hence, he has filed this petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents no. 1 and 2 would submit that the 1st respondent police have received the representation of the petitioner through post and thereafter, the same was forwarded to the 2nd respondent for enquiry. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent issued notice to both the parties and both the parties have 2/5

appeared and the enquiry is still pending. Therefore, they will complete the enquiry within one week.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent would submit that the 3rd respondent is a senior citizen and he has been residing in the said property by constructing a house and now, the petitioner wanted to evict the petitioner with false allegations. Therefore, there is a dispute between the parties in respect of the property and the police protection cannot be granted.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the records.

6. Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for in this petition to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.02.2025 and the 2nd respondent police have also admitted the receipt of the representation dated 06.02.2025, and according to the 3rd respondent, there is a dispute between the parties in respect of the property, the parties can approach the Civil Court for the civil dispute. However, the representation of the petitioner is pending with the 2nd respondent, it is for the 2nd respondent to complete the enquiry within one week. In view of the same, this Court directs the 2nd respondent to complete the enquiry based on the 3/5

representation of the petitioner dated 06.02.2025 after giving opportunities to both the parties within one week from the date of this order.

7. With the above said observations and directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

24.02.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes mac 4/5

P. DHANABAL , J., mac To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Tiruchuli Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

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

24.02.2025 5/5