Madras High CourtWP(MD)/8151/2025disposed of

Prasath S v. The Superintendent Of Police

2025-03-25Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL and W.M.P(MD) No.6112 of 2025

1. S.Prasath

2. Chithra ... Petitioners Vs.

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

2. The Inspector of Police, Chinnamanur Police Station, Chinnamanur, Theni District.

3. Pandiammal

4. Ravi

5. Murugesan

6. Selvi ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to take Page No. 1 of 4

action on the petitioners complainant dated 08.07.2024 seeking to grant police protection for the petitioners life and limb as well as to their property in survey number 1447/1B1, 1447/1B2 with an extent of 27 cents situated at Markayankottai Village, Theni District as per rule 21(1) (iii) Tamil Nadu Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules 2009.

For Petitioners : Mr. S.Suresh Manickam For R1 to R2 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners to direct the respondents to take action on the petitioners complainant dated 08.07.2024 seeking to grant police protection for the petitioners life and limb in respect of their property in S.No.1447/1B1, 1447/1B2 to an extent of 27 cents, situated at Markayankottai Village, Theni District

2. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents no.1 and 2 would submit that the petitioner sent a complaint on 20.06.2023 and based on the same, a case in Crime No.273 of 2023 has been registered and thereafter, no any complaint was Page No. 2 of 4

received from the petitioner.

3. Since the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents no.1 and 3 has denied the receipt of complaint from the petitioner and no any records have been produced to show that the 2nd respondent has received the complaint, it is not appropriate to consider the petitioners representation at this stage. However, if any complaint received, it is for the respondents no. 1 and 2 to take appropriate decision in accordance with law.

4. With the above said observations, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

25.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No Mac Page No. 3 of 4

P.DHANABAL, J.

Mac To

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

2. The Inspector of Police, Chinnamanur Police Station, Chinnamanur, Theni District.

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

25.03.2025 Page No. 4 of 4