Sakthivel v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.03.2023 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Sakthivel ... Petitioner Vs.

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

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vedachandur, Dindigul District.

3. The Sub Inspector of Police, Eriyodu Police Station, Dindigul District.

4. Dhanam, W/o. Raju.

5. Subramanian, S/o. Raju.

6. Selvam, S/o. Raju.

7. Baskaran, S/o. Raju.

8. Angalaeswari ... Respondents 1/5

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the Respondents 2 & 3 to give necessary police protection to the petitioner's life and limb based on his representation dated 23.02.2023.

For Petitioner : Mr.S. Saravanakumar For R1 to R3 : Mr.B.Nambiselvan Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This Petition has been filed seeking direction to direct the Respondents 2 & 3 to give necessary police protection to the petitioner's life and limb based on his representation dated 23.02.2023.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the private respondents are the adjacent land owners to the petitioner and there are created continuos trouble for irrigation. He further submitted that in respect of the patta transfer, the petitioner has filed the writ petition before this Court in W.P(MD).No.18219 of 2015 and the same was disposed of by directing the parties to approach the competent Civil Court. On 05.03.2020, Tahsildar has issued patta in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, the private respondents has filed O.S.No.11 of 2020 for claiming pathway right. In the mean time, on 15.02.2023, the private respondent have given life threat to the labours of the petitioner for allowing them to use the private respondent's property as 2/5

pathway. Hence, the petitioner has made a representation to the respondents 1 and 2 on 23.02.2023 seeking police protection. But, the respondents 1 and 2 have not considered the said representation. Since no order was passed, the petitioner has come before this Court for the above said relief.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents would submit that the respondents 1 and 2 have received the representation and during the course of enquiry process issued summons to the parties and they were did not appear before the respondent police.

5. Because of the civil dispute between the parties, continuos trouble arose between them.

6. In view of the above, concerned respondent police is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 23.02.2023, on its own merits by summoning the petitioner as well as the respondents 4 to 8. The above said process may be completed within a period of 15 days from the date of appearance of the parties. Depending upon the outcome of the enquiry, further action may be taken.

With the above directions, this Criminal Original petition is disposed of.

15.03.2023 Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No 3/5

tta To

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

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vedachandur, Dindigul District.

3. The Sub Inspector of Police, Eriyodu Police Station, Dindigul District.

4. Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.

4/5

G.ILANGOVAN, J., tta 15.03.2023 5/5