Vempayi v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.01.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Vempayi .. Petitioner Vs
1. The Superintendent of Police Office of the Superintendent of Police Ramanthapuram Ramanathapuram District
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police Mudukulathur Circle Ramanthapuram District
3. The Inspector of Police Theriruveli Police Station Mudukulathur, Ramanathapuram District
4. Vemban .. Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to conduct enquiry based on the petitioner's representation dated 21.11.2024 and further directing the third respondent to take legal action as against the fourth respondent within the time period that may be fixed by this Court 1/6
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Yasar Arafath For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar No. 1 to 3 Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to conduct enquiry based on the petitioner's representation dated 21.11.2024 and further direct the third respondent to take legal action as against the fourth respondent within the time period that may be fixed by this Court.
2. The petitioner, widow lady has sent a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mudukulathur and the Inspector of Police, Theriruveli Police Station on 21.11.2024. In the complaint she had stated that she is living along with her two daughters who were married and living away. In the year 2005 the petitioner had taken Rs.2,00,000/- as loan from the fourth respondents. At that time, the fourth respondent had taken original title deeds, patta of the property in S.No.156/21(B). The petitioner had paid back the loan amount along with interest to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-. Thereafter too the fourth respondent is not returning the original 2/6
documents. The petitioner is now in possession and enjoyment of the property. Later when the petitioner attempted to insure the crops in S.No.156/21A and 156/2B she was informed that the fourth respondent had projected the insurance company as though he is the cultivating tenant and had registered the same in his name. The petitioner had immediately objected to the same and demanded original documents from the fourth respondents but the fourth respondent being a money lender demanded exorbitant interest and also threatened and abused the petitioner. The petitioner being a widow and single lady without any protection had lodged complaint, but the respondent police has not taken action.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent is going on for some time and there has been three complaints in current paper Nos. 165,284 and 393. The complaint of the petitioner was enquired and both the petitioner and the fourth respondent appeared before the third respondent on 21.11.2024 and both agreed to approach the Court and resolve the issue. Hence the complaint of the petitioner was closed. The 3/6
current papers references to the earlier complaint and the last enquiry report dated 24.11.2024 are also produced before this Court.
4. On going through the same it is seen that both the petitioner and the fourth respondent were called for enquiry and after enquiry it was closed. The fourth respondent is continuously threatening and abusing the petitioner and also the registration of the fourth respondent as cultivating tenant with the insurance company is not set aside. The petitioner is apprehending fear since she is a widow lady and her two daughters are living separately. The petitioner would be done away and the property would be taken away by the fourth respondent who is possession of the original title deeds. This issue has not been addressed.
5. In view of the same, the third respondent is directed to forward the entire papers, including the enquiry papers between the petitioner and the fourth respondent to the second respondent and the second respondent is directed to conduct enquiry and ensure the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the property and safety of her life and also confirm whether there has been any fleecing of the widow lady by 4/6
charging exorbitant interest and ensure that the complaint of the petitioner is properly addressed.
6. With the above direction the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
03.01.2025 Index: Yes/No Internet : Yes/No aav To
1. The Superintendent of Police Office of the Superintendent of Police Ramanthapuram Ramanathapuram District
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police Mudukulathur Circle Ramanthapuram District
3. The Inspector of Police Theriruveli Police Station Mudukulathur, Ramanathapuram District
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai.
5/6
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
aav 03.01.2025 6/6