Jagan v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.06.2024 CORAM :
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI Jagan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, Collector Complex, Pattinamkathan, Kochi-dhanushkodi Road, Ramanathapuram District, Tamilnadu-623503.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Deputy Superintendent of Police Office, Rameshwaram HO, Rameshwaram (Near TV Tower), Tamilnadu-623 526.
3.The Inspector of Police, C-7 Uchipuli Police Station, Dhanushkodi Road, Uchipillai, Tamilnadu-623 534.
... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.03.2024, 25.03.2024 and 02.04.2024 for taking appropriate action for proving a proper police protection to the petitioner and his family members within a stipulated time framed fixed by this Court.
1/4
For Petitioner : Mr.A.R.Kannappan For Respondents : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor.
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to provide police protection to the petitioner, based on the petitioner's representation dated 20.03.2024, 25.03.2024 and 02.04.2024. 2.The petitioner's mother was murdered by one Murugan and a case had been registered in Cr.No.7 of 2005. The accused was found guilty and was also convicted for life sentence. The accused preferred an appeal and the same was also dismissed and he has come out from the jail, after serving 13 years in the prison. Thereafter, within 20 days, the petitioner has lodged a complaint as if the accused has attempted to assault him, based on which, a case in Cr.No.23 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(i) IPC.
3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submits that the third respondent Police has conducted a 2/4
thorough investigation and found that it is a false complaint and hence, closed the same as mistake of fact. RCS notice has also been served on the petitioner on 26.01.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed this petition seeking police protection, as if he is having a life threat from the above said accused. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the complaint of the petitioner was registered on the same day and the same has also been closed as mistake of fact, on the very same day. Therefore, according to him, the investigation was not conducted in a proper manner. 5.The petitioner has preferred a complaint. It was closed. He was also served with a RCS notice. The petitioner has not prosecuted the same, thereafter. However, he has filed this petition seeking police protection. Considering the report filed by the third respondent Police, this writ petition is closed. The petitioner is at liberty to workout his remedy by filing protest petition.
28.06.2024 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes gns 3/4
B.PUGALENDHI,J gns To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Collector Complex, Pattinamkathan, Kochi-dhanushkodi Road, Ramanathapuram District, Tamilnadu-623503.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Deputy Superintendent of Police Office, Rameshwaram HO, Rameshwaram (Near TV Tower), Tamilnadu-623 526.
3.The Inspector of Police, C-7 Uchipuli Police Station, Dhanushkodi Road, Uchipillai, Tamilnadu-623 534.
28.06.2024 4/4