← Library
Madras High CourtWP Crl.(MD)/2316/2026disposed of

Ramarathinaswamy v. The Superintendent Of Police

2026-04-24Honourable Mrs Justice L.Victoria Gowri4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.04.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Ramarathinaswamy ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi District.

2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Alangulam, Tenkasi District.

3. The Inspector of Police, Pavoorchatram Police Station, Tenkasi District.

4. Mariappan

5. Kadalsamy ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take necessary action in accordance with law as against the 4th and 5th respondents based on the petitioner's representation dated 09.04.2026 and 14.04.2026. For Petitioner : Mr.S.A.Ajmalkhan For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar (R1 to R3) Government Advocate (Crl.) 1/4

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to take necessary action in accordance with law as against the 4th and 5th respondents based on the petitioner's representations dated 09.04.2026 and 14.04.2026, with respect to the private respondents damaging the agricultural motor and other accessories for agriculture.

2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate submitted that, based on the petitioner's representation, a CSR in CSR No.439 of 2026 was registered; however, no cooperation was extended by the petitioner and counter party has also lodged a complaint. It is further submitted that the enquiry was closed on the ground that the dispute is civil in nature, as both the petitioner and the private respondents are agriculturists and the common well is being used for irrigation purposes.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed before this Court a video purportedly depicting the role of the private respondents in damaging the motor installed in the common well.

2/4

4. Heard the learned counsel on either side and carefully perused the materials available on record. Considering the nature of the order proposed to be passed in this writ petition, notice to the private respondents is dispensed with.

5. Though it is submitted by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent police that the enquiry was closed only due to the non-cooperation of the petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that the matter ought not to have been closed in a hurried manner. In this regard, the petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent police forthwith and produce the video footage available with him. Upon receipt of the same, the respondent police is directed to reopen the case and conduct a fresh enquiry, after issuing notice to the private respondents under Section 64 of the BNSS, and conclude the same within a period of four weeks from the date of the petitioner's appearance.

6. With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. 24.04.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No sm 3/4

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

Sm TO:-

1. The Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi District.

2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Alangulam, Tenkasi District.

3. The Inspector of Police, Pavoorchatram Police Station, Tenkasi District.

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

Order made in Dated 24.04.2026 4/4