Thamarai Pushpam v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.03.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Thamarai Pushpam .. Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent of Police Thoothukudi District Thoothukudi

2. The Inspector of Police Thattarmadam Police Station Thoothukudi District

3. Selvaraj

4. Suthagar .. Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to direct the second respondent to give adequate police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 31.01.2025 and 02.02.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Bala Murugan For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar No. 1 and 2 Government Advocate(Crl.Side) 1/5

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the second respondent to give adequate police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 31.01.2025 and 02.02.2025.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the owner of the property in S.F.No.261/6B, 264/C2 to an extent of 89 cents situated at Muthalur Village, Sathankulam Taluk, Thoothukudi District. While so the respondents 3 and 4 without any valid reason interfered with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment and also they caused life threat to the petitioner, thereby the petitioner sent representations to the second respondent on 31.01.2025 and 02.02.2025, but the same have not been considered, hence the present petition has been filed.

3.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that there is a property dispute pending between the petitioner and the respondents 3 and 4 and both the parties have patta for the same property, thereby the matter was enquired 2/5

and closed, therefore nothing survives for further adjudication in this case.

4. Considering the prayer sought for in this petition this Court without issuing notice to the private respondents is inclined to pass orders.

5. According to the petitioner she is the owner of the property and the respondents 3 and 4 without any rights disturbing the possession of the property and also caused life threat, thereby she lodged complaint before the second respondent, according to the second respondent based on the complaint given by the petitioner they conducted enquiry and the same was closed.

6. At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that without conducting any enquiry and without calling the petitioner for enquiry, the enquiry was closed.

7. While so, it is for the petitioner to approach the second respondent if any criminal activities done by any of the private respondents and if any such application is filed before the second respondent, the second respondent he shall take appropriate action in 3/5

accordance with law.

8. Recording the submission made by both the parties, this Criminal Original Petition stands closed.

24.03.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No aav To

1. The Superintendent of Police Thoothukudi District Thoothukudi

2. The Inspector of Police Thattarmadam Police Station Thoothukudi District 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P.DHANABAL,J.

aav 24.03.2025 5/5