Jagadeesan v. The Commissioner Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.07.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN Crl.O.P.[MD]No.7717 of 2020 Jagadeesan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Police, Trichy City, Trichy.

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Srirangam, 3.The Inspector of Police, Srirangam Police Station, 4.N.Anbarasu ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to direct the second and third respondents to provide adequate police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and his family members, based on the petitioner's representation dated 20.06.2020.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Yamuna For R1 & R2 : Mr.S.Chandrasekar Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This petition has been filed seeking direction to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to give police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and his family members.

2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a tenant under one Arujunan in S.F.No.723/1A situated at Shop No.78, 78A, Srirangam, Trichy District. He runs a juice shop in the name of "Relax Corner" in the above said address from the year 2000. One such occasion, the petitioner closed the juice shop and started lottery business in the name of "Yogam Lucky World". In the mean time, the Tamil Nadu Government banned the lottery sales, so the petitioner started cellphone Recharge @ Accessories Sales Business in the name of "Relax @ Co and Relax Communication" in the above said address. In the year 2004, the fourth respondent was introduced with the petitioner and afterward, the petitioner appointed the fourth respondent in his shop as daily wage worker. 1/3

After some time from the date of appointment, the fourth respondent misused and created loss account statement in the petitioner's business and thereby, the petitioner became shocked and get rid of the fourth respondent from his business. Ultimately, while the petitioner herein filed suit in O.S.No.480 of 2018 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Srirangam, on the other hand, the fourth respondent herein filed suit in O.S.No.496 of 2018 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Srirangam and the same is still pending. In compliance with the order passed by the District Munsif Court, Srirangam, on 09.06.

2018, the advocate commissioner present before the disputed property and thereafter, the said advocate commissioner colluded with the fourth respondent and removed the lock of the petitioner's shop without considering the status quo order passed by the trial Court dated 08.06.2018 in favour of the petitioner. In this regard, the petitioner preferred a complaint dated 20.06.2020 before the first respondent praying the relief stated supra. 3.Today, when the petition came up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 made a submission that the complaint dated 20.06.2020 sent by the petitioner was received by the respondents only on 20.07.2020.

He would further submit that as of now, the respondents are started the process for enquiring the dispute having by the petitioner and the fourth respondent, and during the time of enquiry, if it is found that protection is required, suitable action will be taken. 4.Recording the same, this Criminal Original Petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Records) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) rmi 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 Commissioner of Police, Trichy City, Trichy.

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Srirangam, 2/3

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

Crl.O.P.[MD]No.7717 of 2020 KK(06.08.2020) 3P 5C 3/3