Dismissed

Loganathan v. the Commissioner of Police

Madras HC14 Aug 2020CRL OP/12274/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Disposed of a petition for police protection alleging encroachment in a civil property dispute. Held that allegations are civil in nature, no cognizable offence made out, and protection drawn on the petition is denied. Petitioner directed to approach civil court. Case dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Police protection petition dismissed; liberty to approach civil court granted.

Loganathan Vs the Commissioner of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 14.08.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.12274 of 2020

¶6

Loganathan, Son of Chengalvarayan, 9/5, Thiru Nagar, 2^nd Street, Vadapalani, Chennai – 600 026. ...Petitioner vs 1.The Commissioner of Police, Commissioner Office, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.

¶7

2.The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Deputy Commissioner Office, T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017.

¶8

3.The Inspector of Police, R8 Vadapalani Police Station, Vadapalani, Chennai – 600 026. ....Respondents

¶9

PRAYER:- This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the respondents to give police protection to the petitioner and his family members for their life on the basis of petitioner's complaint dated 05.06.2020.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Punithavanan

¶11

For Respondents: Mr.S.Karthikeyan

¶12

Additional Public Prosecutor

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Seeking a direction to the respondents to give police protection to the petitioner and his family members for their life on the basis of the petitioner's complaint dated 05.06.2020, the petitioner is before this Court with this Criminal Original Petition.

¶15

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

¶16

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

¶17

Page numbers

¶18

3.It is seen from the complaint that the entire allegations are civil in nature and there is already a dispute between the petitioner and one Srinivasan in respect of construction of house. It is also averred in the petition that already a Surveyor has been appointed and the petitioner's property was surveyed and thereafter, he started construction. While putting up ceiling for the terrace, the said Srinivasan trying to encroach the petitioner's property. Therefore, the present complaint has been lodged by the petitioner.

¶19

4.The allegations averred in the complaint are completely civil in nature and no cognizable offence is made out to direct the respondent police. Further, the petitioner is also failed to implead the counter party. Under these circumstances, the Police protection as sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted.

¶20

5.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition is
dismissed however, the petitioner is at liberty to approach
the civil Court for appropriate relief.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(ADI-MDU)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Jer
To
1.The Commissioner of Police,
Commissioner Office,
Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.
2.The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Deputy Commissioner Office,
T.Nagar,
Chennai – 600 017.
3.The Inspector of Police,
R8 Vadapalani Police Station,
Vadapalani, Chennai – 600 026.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
Crl.O.P.No.12274 of 2020
RGN(CO)
CB(12/10/2020)

¶21

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

¶22

Page numbers

Loganathan v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Loganathan v. the Commissioner 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

Sankar Kumar Vs State Rep. by

Kathiravan Vs the State

C.Murali Vs The Inspector of Police

Arunkumar Vs State Rep by

K.Sinivasan Vs The Inspector of Police

Murhturaman Vs The Inspector of Police