Madras High CourtWP(MD)/21973/2022disposed of

Prakshpandian v. Police Department

2022-10-18Honourable Mr Justice Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:18.10.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP W.P.(MD)No.21973 of 2022 Prakash Pandian ... Petitioner /vs./

1. The Superintendent of Police Kodaikanal Taluk Dindigul District

2. The Inspector of Police Thandikudi Police Station, Kodaikanal Taluk Dindigul District.

3. Velmurugan

4. Thivagar ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents1 and 2 to secure the Petitioner's life and the Petitioner's Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., which is situated at Palaniyandipuram, Kodaikaanal Taluk, Dindigul District, from the 3rd and 4th Respondent and direct the 2nd Respondent to consider the representation dated on 02.09.2022 1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Sargunam For R1 and R2 : Mr. R.Sivakumar Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

ORDER

The Petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents1 and 2 to secure the Petitioner's life and the Petitioner's Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., which is situated at Palaniyandipuram, Kodaikaanal Taluk, Dindigul District, from the 3rd and 4th Respondent and direct the 2nd Respondent to consider the representation dated on 02.09.2022

2. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner is the distributor of domestic gas of the Hindustan Petroleum. He is supplying gas for 80% cohabitant in Kodaikanal town. Because of the dispute between the tenant and the landlord, the premises was locked. Therefore he had approached this Court filing petition seeking direction against the second Respondent to consider his representation dated 02.09.2022. 2/5

3. The learnd Government by way of reply submitted that based on the complaint given CSR No.209 of 2022 was registered by the second Respondent. In the enquiry the Respondents 3 and 4 participated, whereas the Petitioner did not participate.

4. In the light of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) the Petitioner is directed to cooperate with the pending investigation as as per the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another [2014 (8) SCC 273]. The second Respondent is also directed to follow the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Lalitha Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh reported in 2013 (6) CTC 353 .

5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 18.10.2022 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No aav 3/5

TO:

1. The Superintendent of Police Kodaikanal Taluk Dindigul District

2. The Inspector of Police Thandikudi Police Station, Kodaikanal Taluk Dindigul District.

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

4/5

SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP , J.

aav W.P.(MD)No.21973 of 2022 18.10.2022 5/5