← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/20084/2018dismissed as infructuous

Manikandan v. The State Of Tamilnadu

2019-10-16Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.10.2019

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and W.M.P.(MD) No.17840 of 2018 Manikandan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Keezhakarai Division, Keezhakarai, Ramanathapuram District.

3. Ravichandran, The Superintendent of Police, Keezhakarai Division, Keezhakarai, Ramanathapuram District.

4. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Thirupullani Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

5. The Deputy Manager/The Special Thasildhar, Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV, Vandikara Street, Taluk Office, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District - 623 501.

6. Jeyabarath ... Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ Mandamus, directing the respondents-1 & 2 and 4 to grant police protection for "Life and Limb" as well as to petitioner's business premises M/s.Arunachala Cable (LCO No.48711) at Bus Stand, Ragunathapuram, Ramanathapuram District. For Petitioner : M/s. A. Hafiza For R-1 to R-4 : Mr.R. Anandharaj, Additional Public Prosecutor For R5 : Mr.S.Gunasekaran For R6 : Mr.M.Thirunavukarasu 1/3

ORDER

This petition has been filed to direct the respondents -1 & 2 and 4 to grant police protection for "Life and Limb" as well as to petitioner's business premises M/s.Arunachala Cable (LCO No.48711) at Bus Stand, Ragunathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that based on a complaint lodged by the petitioner, the fourth respondent has conducted enquiry, but, the petitioner did not co-operate for the enquiry. Therefore, the prayer sought for by the petitioner has become infructuous.

3. In view of the above submission, the Writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a fresh complaint on fresh cause of action to the fourth respondent. On receipt of the same, the fourth respondent is directed to conduct enquiry, after issuing notice to the sixth respondent on merits and in accordance with law. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) ksa To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Keezhakarai Division, Keezhakarai, Ramanathapuram District.

3. Ravichandran, The Superintendent of Police, Keezhakarai Division, Keezhakarai, Ramanathapuram District.

4. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Thirupullani Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

2/3

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

+1 CC to Mr.M.THIRUNAVUKKARASU, Advocate ( SR-92302[F] dated 17/10/2019 ) +1 CC to Mr.P.M.VISHNUVARTHANAN, Advocate ( SR-92606[F] dated 17/10/2019 ) +1 CC to Mr.S.GUNASEKARAN, Advocate ( SR-92788[F] dated 18/10/2019 ) 16.10.2019 MK (19.11.2019) 3P 9C 3/3