L. Nachiappan, v. the Superintendent of Police
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner challenged police interference in a civil land dispute via Writ Petition under Article 226. He sought to restrain police from compelling settlement via a panchayat. The Court noted the pending civil suit but disposed of the petition by allowing future inquiry without harassment. This is a thin order. (61 words)
What the court decided
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.11.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P(MD)No.18177 of 2013
L.Nachiappan ..Petitioner Vs
1.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Anti Land Grabbing Cell, Sivagangai District.
3.S.Anthony Udayar
rep.by his power agent S.Thangadurai
..Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 from interfering into the civil dispute pending between the petitioner and the third respondent and not to compel/harass the petitioner to settle as dictated by the third respondent by conducting katta panchayat.
For Petitioner :Mr.K.R.Laxman For R-1 & R-2 :Mr.A.Muthukaruppan, Additional Govt. Pleader
ORDER
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether police authorities can interfere in a civil dispute pending in a competent civil court.
Whether a writ of Mandamus can be issued to restrain police from compelling a petitioner to settle a civil dispute.
Whether the police enquiry into a complaint regarding alleged forgery is a case of harassment or legitimate inquiry.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
L. Nachiappan
- respondent
The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District
- respondent
The Inspector of Police, Anti Land Grabbing Cell, Sivagangai District
- respondent
S. Anthony Udayar
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court