Shaym Maria Vivek v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.07.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI Shaym Maria Vivek ... Petitioner versus
1. The Superintendent of Police, District Police Office,
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Town Sub Division,
3. The Inspector of Police, Taluk Police Station,
4. Sasikala
5. Karthik
6. Mallika ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 3rd respondent herein to take appropriate action and conduct proper enquiry as against the 1/4
respondents 4 to 6, in the light of the petitioner's representations/complaint dated 07.06.2025 in connection with CSR No.648 of 2025 dated 07.06.2025 in accordance with law as per the direction laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Lalita Kumari vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh, within a stipulated period as may be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sakthivel For R1 to R3 : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
The petitioner, with a grievance that his complaint dated 07.06.2025 has not been enquired by the respondent police, has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent police.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the private respondents broke open the door and criminally trespassed into the property.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the complaint of the petitioner dated 07.06.2025 was treated as petition enquiry in CSR No.648 of 2025 and the same was closed on 12.07.2025 after recording the statement of the parties that they would resolve their issue 2/4
before the Civil Court.
4. The allegation in the petitioner's complaint appears to be a civil in nature. However, the respondent Police has entertained the same and closed the same on 12.07.2025, after recording the statement of the parites.
5. In view of the same, this Writ Petition is closed with a direction to the respondent Police to furnish a copy of the closure report to the petitioner enabling him to workout his remedy in the manner known to law. No costs. 14.07.2025 ogy NCC : Yes / No.
Index : Yes / No.
Internet : Yes / No.
To
1. The Superintendent of Police, District Police Office,
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Town Sub Division, 3/4
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
ogy
3. The Inspector of Police, Taluk Police Station,
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
14.07.2025 4/4