Velan Perumal v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Velan Perumal ... Petitioner Vs.

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

2.The Inspector of Police, S.S.Kottai Police Station, Sivagangai District.

3.Thirugnanam ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, direct the second respondent to provide adequate police protection to life and limb of the petitioner and his family members including his friend Rajeshkannan based on his representation, dated 07.10.2024 and pass such other or further orders as this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthu Meena 1/5

For R-1 & R-2 : 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 provide adequate police protection to life and limb of the petitioner and his family members based on his representation, dated 07.10.2024.

2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is the owner of the property in S.No.122/7 situated at Erumaipatti Village, Singampuneri Taluk, Sivagangai District and the third respondent very often interfered with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment and also giving life threat to the petitioner and thereby, he sent a representation, dated 07.10.2024 and the same has not been considered. Hence, the petitioner filed this petition.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the official respondents would submit that there is a property dispute 2/5

pending between the petitioner and the third respondent and the same is now pending before the District Revenue Officer. Already the District Revenue Officer passed orders in proceedings No.x.K.m1/8832/2023 dated 12.01.2024 and now the same is pending before the District Revenue Officer, Sivagangai. In the meantime, the petitioner lodged a complaint and CSR No.194 of 2025 was assigned and thereafter, it was closed by conducting elaborate enquiry. Therefore, nothing survives for further adjudication in this case.

4. Since the prayer of the petitioner is to consider the representation by the second respondent, this Court even without issuing notice to the third respondent inclined to pass orders in this case.

5. According to the petitioner, the third respondent caused disturbance to the enjoyment of the property and also made life threat to the petitioner and thereby, he sent a representation to the second respondent but the second respondent closed the same after enquiry. While so, if any parties indulged any criminal activities, they can 3/5

approach the second respondent by specific complaint in accordance with law.

6. In view of the above said terms, this writ petition stands closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

18.03.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes BTR To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

2.The Inspector of Police, S.S.Kottai Police Station, Sivagangai District.

4/5

P.DHANABAL, J.

BTR 18.03.2025 5/5