← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/11957/2021disposed of

Varatharajan.N v. The Commissioner Of Police

2023-07-27Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 27.07.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL N.Varatharajan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Police, Commissioner Office, Subramaniyapuram, Trichy.

2.The Inspector of Police, Cantonment Police Station, Trichy.

3.A.Sakthivelan 4.K.Selvakumar 5.S.Raviprasad ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent nos.1 and 2 to provide necessary police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and his family members and to take action against the respondents 3 to 5, by considering the petitioner's representation dated on 12.07.2021, in accordance with law.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Balamurugapandi For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor For Respondents 3 and 4 : Mr.K.Sivabalan For 5th Respondent : No Appearance 1/4

ORDER

The petitioner has filed this writ petition in a nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents1 and 2 to provide necessary police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and his family members and to take action against the respondents 3 to 5, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 12.07.2021.

2.According to the petitioner, he sent a representation dated 12.07.2021 alleging that there are some dispute between the petitioner and the private respondents 3 to 5 and that they threatened the petitioner and to take appropriate action against the said persons. 3.No counter was filed on the side of the respondents. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the respondents have threatened the petitioner and thereby, the petitioner gave a representation before the respondents 1 and 2 dated 12.07.2021. Still the said representation has not been considered by the respondents 1 and 2. 2/4

5.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 4 would contend that no occurrence was happened as alleged by the petitioner. Already the respondent police have enquired the matter and closed the representation. Thereby, nothing survives in this petition for further adjudication.

6.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would contend that the representation of the petitioner was received by the second respondent and the same is still pending.

7.In view of the above submissions and considering that the representation dated 12.07.2021 was not disposed so far and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner within the stipulated time. Accordingly, the respondents 1 and 2 are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 12.07.2021, by affording chance to both the parties and pass orders in accordance with law and the above said exercise is to be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

3/4

P.DHANABAL,J.

Mrn 8.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No Costs.

27.07.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Mrn To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Commissioner Office, Subramaniyapuram, Trichy.

2.The Inspector of Police, Cantonment Police Station, Trichy.

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

Writ Petition (MD).No.11957 of 2021 4/4