Backiyavathi v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN W.P.Crl.(MD).No.971 of 2025 Backiyavathi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Kenikkarai Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Block Development Officer, Ramanathapuram Block, Ramanathapuram District.

4.Jeyaraman

...Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner's life and limb by conducting enquiry based on her representation dated 01.08.2025 pending before the 1st and 2nd respondents.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Mahendrarajan For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor For R-3 : Mr.D.S.Nedunchezian Government Advocate

ORDER

The petitioner has sought for a Writ of Mandamus directing the first and second respondents to provide police protection to her life and limb by conducting an enquiry based on her representation dated 01.08.2025.

2. Even according to the petitioner, there is a civil dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent with regard to the land and house in possession of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the fourth respondent would come in an inebriated condition when her husband was not at the house and threaten her.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, per contra, submitted that under the guise of this petition, the petitioner has sought for a direction to the police to interfere in a civil dispute. He would also submit that the petitioner's husband has already filed a complaint against the fourth respondent and since the complaint was not registered, he had approached the learned Judicial 2/5

Magistrate No.II, Ramanathapuram under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C for registration of FIR in Crl.M.P.No.972 of 2025, which is pending.

4. It is well settled that when there is a civil dispute, unless the rights of the parties are finally determined, no police protection can be granted at the request of one party. At the same time, if the fourth respondent has threatened the petitioner, it is open to her to lodge a complaint in the manner known to law. The petitioner has not filed any complaint against the fourth respondent with regard to the alleged threat or any other offence said to have been committed by the fourth respondent. Admittedly, the petitioner's husband has already lodged a complaint and a petition under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C is pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Ramanathapuram. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to pass any orders in this petition.

5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

02.09.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Lm 3/5

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kenikkarai Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Block Development Officer, Ramanathapuram Block, Ramanathapuram District.

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

4/5

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

Lm W.P.Crl.(MD).No.971 of 2025 02.09.2025 5/5