P.Shanmugam Chettiar v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.06.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN P.Shanmugam Chettiar ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police Ramanathapuram, 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Parthibanoor Police Station, 4.Thavidu @ Pitchai 5.Kaleeswari 6.Vigneswaran 7.Santhana Prakash ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondents 1 to 3 herein to provide protection to the petitioner and his family members for worshiping Arulmigu Sri Ariyasamy Temple comprised in old Survey No.261/5, New Survey No.457/27 situated at Parthibanoor, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District from the hands of the respondents 4 to 7. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Senthilmurugan For R1 to R3 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 3 herein to provide police protection to the petitioner and his family members for worshiping Arulmigu Sri Ariyasamy Temple comprised in Old Survey No.261/5, New Survey No.457/27 situated at Parthibanoor, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District from the hands of the respondents 4 to 7. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's father purchased the above said property for a valuable consideration and mutated all the revenue records and 1/3

enjoyed the same without adversity. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents 4 to 7 trespassed into the above said temple and picked quarrel with the petitioner and his family members. Hence, he made a complaint before the third respondent in person, where the third respondent conducted enquiry and advised to the respondents 4 to 7 to file appropriate civil case. Thereafter, the respondents 4 to 7 kept quiet for sometimes and again started to cause hindrance, for which, the petitioner sent a complaint through post on 24.04.2021 to the respondents 1 to 3. Since the respondents 1 to 3 have not taken any action, the petitioner is before this Court seeking police protection.

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner has lodged a complaint dated 24.04.2021 and it is pending. He further submitted that the representation of the petitioner, dated 24.04.2021 will be considered by the respondents 1 to 3.

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents 1 to 3 are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 24.04.2021 by following the due process of law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6.With the above direction, this criminal original petition is disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS II) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) NOTE: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To:- 1.The Superintendent of Police Ramanathapuram, 2/3

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

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

02.06.2021 AS(09.06.2021)3P 5C 3/3