A. Panchavarnam v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.03.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL A.Panchavarnam .. Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent of Police Madurai District, Madurai

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police O/o.Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thirumangalam Madurai District

3. The Inspector of Police Austinpatti Police Station Thirumangalam Madurai District 4.Ramalakshmi

5. Seethalakshmi .. Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to direct the first respondent to direct the third respondent to give adequate police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner based on the representation dated 04.03.2025.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sivaprakash For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar No.1 to 3 Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the first respondent to direct the third respondent to give adequate police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner based on the representation dated 04.03.2025.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that there is a dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent who is the daughter-in-law of the petitioner. The fourth respondent without maintaining the petitioner received the pension of the petitioner's son, thereby the petitioner lodged complaint before the appropriate authorities but they have not considered the said representation, therefore she sent a representation dated 04.03.2025 for police protection but the same has not been considered by the respondent police, hence the present petition has been filed.

3. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the petitioner gave a complaint 2/5

against the fourth respondent and the fourth respondent also lodged complaint as against the petitioner and both the complaints were disposed of after enquiring both the parties. Both the parties agreed to settle the issue amicably and the fourth respondent agreed to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- to the petitioner from the pension. They entered into agreement and thereafter both the complaints were closed. Since the matter has been settled between the parties nothing survives for further adjudication in this case.

4. Considering the limited scope of prayer sought for in this petition without issuing notice to the private respondents this Court is inclined to dispose of the petition. According to the petitioner the representation of the petitioner was not considered. According to the respondent police the representation of the petitioner was already considered and the same was disposed of. Therefore it is for the petitioner to approach the appropriate authorities if any deviation in the compromise between the parties and the petitioner is at liberty to approach the appropriate authorities for protection of her life and property in accordance with law. 3/5

5. With the above direction, the Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of.

11.03.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No aav To

1. The Superintendent of Police Madurai District, Madurai

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police O/o.Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thirumangalam Madurai District

3. The Inspector of Police Austinpatti Police Station Thirumangalam Madurai District 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P.DHANABAL,J.

aav 11.03.2025 5/5