Pandarachamy v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.11.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and WMP(MD)No.20283 of 2019 Pandarachamy ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Aalangulam, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

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

4.The Sub Inspector of Police, Pavoorchatram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

5.Chinnadurai 6.Mayandi ... Respondents Prayer : This petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the second respondent from interfering in the civil dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent pertaining to the subject properties in Survey No.454/3, Pavoorchatram Village, Tirunelveli District and from compelling the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) to the sixth respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.T.R.Jeyapalam For R1 to R4 : Mr.R.Anandharaj Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This petition has been filed forbearing the second respondent from interfering in the civil dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent pertaining to the subject property in Survey 1/3

No.454/3 at Pavoorchatram Village, Tirunelveli District and from compelling the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) to the sixth respondent.

2. It is seen that based on the complaint lodged by the 6th respondent, the third respondent issued CSR.No.655 of 2019 and conducted enquiry with the petitioner and the 5th respondent. During the enquiry, the petitioner never come to compromise with the respondents 5 and 6 for the reason that the dispute is civil in nature.

3.Considering the above facts and circumstance of the case, the second respondent is directed not to interfere with the civil dispute with the petitioner and the respondent Nos.5 and 6. On the complaint lodged by the 6th respondent, if any cognizable offence is made out as against the petitioner, the third respondent is at liberty to take appropriate action as against the petitioner in accordance with law.

4.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) vsd To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Aalangulam, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

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

4.The Sub Inspector of Police, Pavoorchatram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

2/3

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

+1 CC to Mr.T.R.JEYAPALAM, Advocate ( SR-97304[F] dated 11/11/2019 ) and WMP(MD)No.20283 of 2019 11.11.2019 MK (11.12.2019) 3P 7C 3/3