Dismissed

Muthukumaran v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC17 Jun 2015CRL OP/10108/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Police protection sought for property construction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Court permitted withdrawal but declined due to inconsistent complaints. Petition dismissed with costs of Rs. 5000 payable to TN Legal Services Authority for misleading the Court.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; cost of Rs. 5,000 imposed payable to Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority within four weeks.

Muthukumaran Vs the Inspector of Police — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 17.06.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶5

Crl.OP No.10108 of 2015

¶6

1.Muthukumaran
2.Raja .. Petitioners
Vs
1.The Inspector of Police,
Mailam Police Station,
Mailam,
Villupuram District.
2.Amsammal
3.Shanmugam
4.Sumathi
5.Kothai .. Respondents

¶7

Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the first respondent to grant Police protection to the petitioners for putting up fence and compound wall in their property in Old S.No.118, New S.No.271/13B measuring an extent of 30 ft east west and 42 ft north south situate at Pathirapuliyur village, Tindivanam Taluk.

¶8

For Petitioners :Mr.N.Suresh For R1 :Mr.C.Emalias, Addll.Public.Prosecutor

¶9

ORDER

¶10

Seeking a direction to the first respondent Police to provide Police protection to the petitioners for putting up fence and compound wall in their property in Old S.No.118, New S.No.271/13B measuring an extent of 30 ft east west and 42 ft north south situate at Pathirapuliyur village, Tindivanam Taluk, the petitioners have come up with this petition.

¶11

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent Police.

¶12

3.On 27.04.2015, this Court passed the following order:

¶13

Today when the matter was called, the respondent Police is present with the case file. The learned Addl.Public Prosecutor submitted that the complaint which has been given by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner to the respondent Police dated

¶14

28.02.2015 is different from the complaint that has been enclosed in the typed set of papers. Photocopy of the complaint from the Police record has been taken by this Court and the same has been handed over to the learned Counsel for petitioner to get instructions from his client.

¶15

Post on 17.06.2015 “for orders”.

¶16

Today, the learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the petition and permission is declined. It is seen that the complaint given by the petitioner to the Police is different from the complaint that has been enclosed in the typed set of papers. This Court deprecates such practice. Hence, this petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only). The petitioner should pay the said cost to the Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority, Chennai within four (4) weeks.

¶17

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Member Secretary,
Tamil Nadu State Legal Service Authority,
Chennai.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Mailam Police Station,
Mailam,
Villupuram District.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1 cc to Mr.N.Suresh, Advocate,SR.29857.
Kji(co)
krd 29/6
Crl.OP No.10108 of 2015

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Muthukumaran v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muthukumaran v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Abdul Rasheed Vs the Inspector of Police

Saradha, Age 45 Yrs, Vs the Inspector of Police

Karikalan Vs State Rep. by

Mr.Dharmadev Maurya Vs Sudhir Kumar Singh

Riyazith Farooq Vs M.Kuthbutheen

M/S.Galaxy Amaze Kingdom Ltd., Vs M/S.Steward Capital Pvt.Ltd.