Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/7133/2021disposed of

Rajendran v. The Superintendent Of Police

2021-06-03Honourable Mr Justice A.A.Nakkiran2 pages

Crl.O.P(MD)No.7133 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.06.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN Crl.O.P(MD)No.7133 of 2021 Rajendran ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The State rep. By The Inspector of Police, Kannivadi Police Station,Dindigul District.

3.M.Raja ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, directing the second respondent to provide adequate police protection to survey and demarcate the petitioner's land and also to fence it comprised in Survey No.61/2, measuring to an extent of 6.20 acres, situated at Kannivadi Village, Aathur Taluk, Dindigul District, by considering his representation, dated 23.04.2021. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar For R1 and R2 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the second respondent to provide adequate police protection to survey and demarcate the petitioner's land and also to fence it comprised in Survey No.61/2, measuring to an extent of 6.20 acres, situated at Kannivadi Village, Aathur Taluk, Dindigul District, by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 23.04.2021. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the third respondent, who is the stranger, attempted to grab the petitioner's property. In this regard, the petitioner lodged a complaint before the second respondent in the year 2017 and on receipt of the complaint, the second respondent conducted enquiry and advised the third respondent and also warned him that not to indulge any such act in future.

Thereafter, the petitioner intends to clean the land, to enable the authorities, to survey the land, but, the third respondent made an objection and also not to allow the revenue officials to survey the land. Hence, the petitioner made a representation before the second respondent, on 23.04.2021. Since the respondent police have not taken any action, the petitioner is before this Court seeking police protection.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P(MD)No.7133 of 2021 3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner has lodged a complaint dated 23.04.2021 and it is pending. He further submitted that the representation of the petitioner, dated 23.04.2021 will be considered by the respondents 1 and 2.

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent police are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 23.04.2021 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(P & A) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Ls 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 Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kannivadi Police Station, Dindigul District.

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

+1 CC to M/s.T.LENIN KUMAR, Advocate (SR-18749[F] dated 04/06/2021) Crl.O.P(MD)No.7133 of 2021 03.06.2021 se(CO) TR(17.06.2021) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2