Devi Ammal v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 08.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI W.P.Crl(MD)No.1928 of 2026 Devi Ammal ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by, the Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

2.The State of Tamilnadu, Rep By the Inspector of Police, Aranthangi Police Station, Pudukkottai District.

3.Gopalan 4.Tamilselvan 5.The Block Development Officer, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukottai Dsitrict.

... Respondents (R5 is suo motu impleaded by this Court vide order dated 08.04.2026) PRAYER :-Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to provide adequate police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and her family members, based on the complaint in C.S.R.No.310/2026 dated 19.03.2026 and representation dated 23.03.2026 within the time stipulated by this Court. 1/7

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Prasanna For R1 & R2 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate(Criminal Side) For R5 : Mr.C.Satheesh Government Advocate(Civil Side)

ORDER

Seeking to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to provide adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner and her family based on the complaint in C.S.R.No.310 of 2026 dated 19.03.2026 and representation dated 23.03.2026, this writ petition filed.

2. Since no adverse order is passed against the private respondents, notice to the private respondents is dispensed with.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the absolute owner in possession of the property consisting an area of 8 1⁄2 cents comprised in Survey No.97/1G1 at Ramasamipuram Village, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District. The petitioner had purchased the property in the capacity of guardian in favour of her two minor sons by a registered sale deed in Document No.39/1984 on the file of the Sub Registrar, Aranthangi. The revenue authorities attempted to lay a road in the petitioner's patta land without any authority. Hence, she was constrained to file a suit in O.S.No.22 of 2026 2/7

against the revenue authorities for the relief of permanent injunction and mandatory injunction and the same is pending. While so, the 4th respondent is continuously threatening the petitioner and her family members in person through phone calls compelling the petitioner to give consent for the formation of pathway through their property. On 19.03.2026, the private respondents along with 50 persons had unlawfully assembled in front of the petitioner's house and criminally intimidated the petitioner and her family members to lay a pathway in the land, or else they would burn the house. The petitioner lodged a complaint before the 2nd respondent on 19.03.2026, for which no action has been taken by the police till date. Even thereafter, representation has been sent, that is also not attended to. In the interregnum, yesterday morning i.e.

, on 07.04.2026, the 3rd and 4th respondents have entered into the petitioner's property and are indulging in hooliganism by cutting down the standing crops and trees in the petitioner's land. Hence, it is necessary that the 2nd respondent police should take immediate steps to ensure the protection of the petitioner's life, limb, and property.

4. The learned Government Advocate submitted that the petitioner has not come before this Court with clean hands. Without impleading the revenue authorities, he had filed this writ petition. That apart, he also pointed out that 3/7

only by this year, the petitioner had filed a civil suit in O.S.No.22 of 2026 against the revenue authorities without impleading the 3rd and 4th respondents for a relief of permanent injunction and mandatory injunction, in which no interim injunction has been passed by the learned Trial Court. He also pointed out that pending civil suit, the police has closed the complaint lodged by the petitioner in C.S.R.No.310 of 2026 considering the civil nature of the dispute involved.

5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and carefully perused the materials available on record.

6. The Block Development Officer, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District is suo motu impleaded as 5th respondent.

7. Considering the petitioner's plight is that the revenue authorities are trying to lay a road in the petitioner's patta land and the petitioner being a senior citizen/ woman, it is for the revenue authorities to be cautious enough in laying of road, that too, in case the same is proposed to be laid in a patta land. Proper opportunity of hearing should have been given to the petitioner and proper proposal should have been made and proper compensation should also have been given before proceeding to lay the road by proper acquisition land from the petitioner. In this regard, if the authorities proceeded to lay the road 4/7

without following the formalities for acquiring land from a private person, it is for the police to plunge into action and take necessary steps to protect the petitioner's life, limb and land . Hence, the 2nd respondent is directed to put the petitioner as well as the 3rd and 4th respondents on summon under Section 64 of BNSS, 2023. It is also necessary for the 2nd respondent police to require the jurisdictional Block Development Officer, Aranthangi Taluk to appear in this regard and obtain necessary details as to whether the land was surveyed, and the petitioner is also directed to produce all the title deeds to the 2nd respondent police. If it is found that the petitioner's land is an absolute patta land, till the disposal of the civil suit, it is made clear that the road should not be laid in the petitioner's land, except otherwise in the manner known to law, after following all the procedures for acquisition of said land. It is the duty of the 2nd respondent to protect the petitioner till the disposal of the suit.

8. With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

08.04.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No gbg 5/7

To 1.The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by, the Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

2.The State of Tamilnadu, Rep By the Inspector of Police, Aranthangi Police Station, Pudukkottai District.

3.The Block Development Officer, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukottai Dsitrict.

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

6/7

L.VICTORIA GOWRI,J gbg W.P.Crl(MD)No.1928 of 2026 08.04.2026 7/7