A.Shanthi v. The Superintendent Of Police, Theni,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 29/10/2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN A.Shanthi ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police, 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, 3.The Inspector of Police, Chinnamanur Police Station, 4.The Sub Inspector of Police, Chinnamanur Police Station, 5.The District Collector, O/o. The District Collector, 6.The Tahsildar, 1/5

7.M.Kamala 8.K.Veeraiya 9.V.Valarmathi 10.J.Ramapriya 11.P.Murugeswari 12.M.Selvi 13.M.Suresh Kumar 14.P.Vijayaprabha 15.V.Ramanipriya 16.J.Siddharth 17.J.Ashokvarman ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner's life and limb and peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property in respect of Survey No.103/4 to an extent of 1 Acre and 70 cents, situated at Appiatti @ Alagapuri Village, Chinnamanur Taluk, Theni District in conformity to the order made in O.S.No.65/2021 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Uthamapalayam, Theni by considering the petitioner's representation dated 19.09.2025. 2/5

For Petitioner : Mr.H.Mohammed Imran For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi, Addl. Public Prosecutor for R1 to R4 Mr.A.Oliraja, Govt. Advocate for R5 & R6

ORDER

The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents 1 to 5 to provide police protection for her life and for the peaceful possession and enjoyment of her property in Survey No.103/4 measuring an extent of 1 Acre and 70 cents, situated at Appiatti @ Alagapuri Village, Chinnamanur Taluk, Theni District.

2.It is the case of the petitioner that she had filed a suit against the respondents 7 to 17 in O.S.No.65/2021; that the respondents 7 to 17 remained absent; that the learned District Munsif, Uthamapalayam, Theni District passed a judgment and decree granting permanent injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the petitioner's possession and that the private respondents 7 to 17 are still attempting to interfere with her possession.

3/5

3.If the petitioner is aggrieved by the violation of the judgment and decree, it is for her to seek execution of the said judgment. The respondent police cannot execute the judgment, which is said to be in her favor. Therefore, no direction as prayed for can be issued. 4.With the above observation, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.

29.10.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No cp TO 1.The Superintendent of Police, 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, 3.The Inspector of Police, Chinnamanur Police Station, 4.The Sub Inspector of Police, Chinnamanur Police Station, 4/5

SUNDER MOHAN,J cp 5.The District Collector, O/o. The District Collector, 6.The Tahsildar, 7.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER

IN WP CRL.(MD) No.1897 of 2025 Date : 29/10/2025 5/5