Elephant G.Rajendran, v. The Chief Secretary
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner sought free police protection due to threats from idol traffickers linked to his PILs on temple idol theft. Fourth respondent admitted imminent danger. Court recorded Respondents' submission to consider claim on merits and closed petition without directing protection.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.08.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
W.P.No.6695 of 2018
Elephant G. Rajendran ... Petitioner
Vs
1. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Home Secretary,
Government of Tamil Nadu
Secretariat, Chennai- 600 009.
3. The Director General of Police,
Mylapore, Chennai- 600 004.
4. The Inspector General of Police,
Idol Theft Wing C.I.D
Old Sipcot Building,
Industrial Estate,
Guindy, Chennai- 32. ... Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the
respondents the Chief Secretary, Home Secretary, Director
General of Police and Inspector General of Police, Idol Wing CID
to provide police protection on free of cost to the petitioner
without further delay.
For Petitioner : Elephant G. Rajendran
party-in-person
For Respondents : Mr.P.H.Aravind Pandian, AAG
assisted by Mr.J.Ramesh, AGP
ORDER
The petitioner has come up with this writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents to provide police protection to him, free of cost.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the state is obliged to provide free police protection to the petitioner facing threats from idol traffickers.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Elephant G. Rajendran
- respondent
The Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu
- respondent
The Home Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu
- respondent
The Director General of Police
- respondent
The Inspector General of Police, Idol Theft Wing C.I.D
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court