R.Gnanasundaram v. the Superintendent of Police
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner sought writ direction to prevent police harassment in a property dispute. Court reiterated earlier orders restraining police interference unless a cognizable offence is committed, effectively dismissing the prayer.
What did the court decide?
Directed police not to interfere with the civil dispute unless a cognizable offence is committed; writ petition closed.
What the court decided
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.06.2017 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH
W.P.(MD)No.21834 of 2016 & WMP(MD).No.15603 of 2016
R.Gnanasundaram ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Samayapuram Police Station (Law and Order), Trichy District.
3.Thangavel ... Respondents (3rd respondent impleaded vide order dated 12.06.2017, in W.M.P.No.17755 of 2016)
Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent not to harass the petitioner by forcing the petitioner to vacate the Mandapam in Door No.12 which is the subject matter of the suit in O.S.No.398 of 2015, on the file of Sub Court, Trichirapplli.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Maheswaran For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohindeen for R1 and R2 Additional Government Pleader Mr.R.Rajaraman for R3
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether police can be directed not to interfere in a pending civil dispute regarding property possession.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
R.Gnanasundaram
- respondent
The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District
- respondent
The Inspector of Police, Samayapuram Police Station
- respondent
Thangavel
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court