Veluchamy v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 20.02.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Veluchamy ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Oddanchatram, Dindigul District.

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

... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to conduct enquiry based on the petitioner's complaint, dated 18.09.2024 in CSR No.358/2024 on the file of the second respondent and take necessary action in accordance with law within time limit as stipulated by this Court and pass such further or other orders as this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Saravana Kumar 1/5

For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The present petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to conduct enquiry based on the petitioner's complaint, dated 18.09.2024 in CSR No.358/2024 on the file of the second respondent and take necessary action in accordance with law.

2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is the owner of the property in S.No.804/2, Kariyampatti Village, Ottanchathram Taluk, Dindigul District. There is a dispute between the petitioner and one Vanjiyappan and others. While so, on 18.09.2024 at about 10.30 am., when the petitioner along with his labours were in the agricultural field, the said Vanjiyappan, Subha, Manimuthu @ Paapathi and Kamaraj had entered into the property and they caused life threat to the petitioner and also damaged the tomato plants and attempted to burn the JCB vehicle of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner lodged a complaint before the 2/5

second respondent on 18.09.2024 and they assigned CSR No.358/2024. Thereafter, they have not taken any steps. Thereby, the petitioner sent a representation, dated 17.10.2024 but the same has not been considered. Therefore, the petitioner filed this petition.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, they assigned CSR No.358/2024 and thereafter, they conducted enquiry and they closed the same on 21.09.2024 by advising the parties to approach the civil Court since the dispute is civil in nature. Therefore, the complaint, dated 18.09.2024 was considered and the same was closed. Hence, nothing survives for further adjudication.

4. Since the complaint of the petitioner, dated 18.09.2024 was already considered and the same was closed, it is for the petitioner to challenge the same in the manner known to law, if he is so aggrieved. However, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would also submit that on 17.10.2024 the petitioner sent a representation but the same has not been considered. This Court also perused the said 3/5

representation and that representation is in respect of the occurrence, dated 18.09.2024 but the said complaint for the said occurrence was already considered and the same was closed. Therefore, the petitioner has to take appropriate steps as against the closure of the complaint in the manner known to law.

6. With the above said observations, this writ petition stands closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

20.02.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes BTR To 1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Oddanchatram, Dindigul District.

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

4/5

P.DHANABAL, J.

BTR 20.02.2025 5/5