Chellam v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.03.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Chellam ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District..

2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Manapparai Taluk, Trichy District.

3. The Inspector of Police, Vaiyampatti Police Station, Vaiyampatti.

4. Marimuthu

5. Jeyaraj ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1/5

respondents No.1 to 3 to give the police protection to the petitioners representation dated 30.09.2024.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian, For R1 to R3 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents No.1 to 3 to give the police protection to the petitioners representation dated 30.09.2024.

2.According to the petitioner, she is the owner of the property in S.F.No.309 of 29 to an extent of 0.65.00 hectares at Nadupatti Village, Trichirapalli District. While so, the respondents 4 and 5 attempted to trespass into the property and thereby, the petitioner wants to fence the property and laid stones. Already the petitioner filed a partition suit in O.S.N.356 of 1995 before the Additional Sub Court, Trichirapalli and the same was ended in favour of the petitioner and already the possession of 2/5

the property was recognised by the Court. When the petitioner is in exclusive possession of the property, on 01.09.2024, the respondents 4 and 5 with the help of one Dhamodharan, gave a life threat to the petitioner using sickle and wooden log and abused in filthy language, thereby, the petitioner sent the representation dated 03.05.2024 as against the private respondents, but the same has not been considered. Hence this petition.

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that based on the petitioner's complaint, CSR was assigned and thereafter, an FIR in Crime No.280 of 2024 was registered against the fourth and fifth respondents and the same is pending. Since the petitioner's representation was already considered and an FIR was registered, nothing survives for further adjudication. 4.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court, without even issuing notice to the private respondents, is inclined to pass order.

3/5

5.Recording the submission made on behalf of the third respondent that the petitioner's representation was already considered and an FIR was registered, this writ petition is closed. 19.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District..

2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Manapparai Taluk, Trichy District.

3. The Inspector of Police, Vaiyampatti Police Station, Vaiyampatti.

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

4/5

P.DHANABAL , J.

LR 19.03.2025 5/5