Dismissed

A.Murugesan, S/O.Arumuga v. the District Collector

Madras HC24 Nov 2020WP(MD)/17346/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition under Article 226 sought police protection and an enquiry into excombination. The respondent Government Advocate submitted that a case was registered but later closed as a mistake of fact. The court held the petition lacked merits and dismissed it.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition seeking police protection and enquiry into excommunication was dismissed with no costs.

A.Murugesan, S/O.Arumuga Vs the District… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.17346 of 2016

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 24.11.2020

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.17346 of 2016

¶7

A.Murugesan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
3.The Inspector of Police, Eriodu Police Station, Dindigul District.
4.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kujiliyamparai Police Station, Dindigul District.
5.V.Kanthasamy Goundar
6.M.Jothibasu
7.M.Suresh
8.A.Gandhi ... Respondents
PRAYER:-Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to conduct detailed enquiry, with regard to the practice of excommunication, on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 21.04.2016 and consequently to take necessary action to provide the petitioner and his family police protection to live peaceful life in his village in accordance with the law within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶8

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

¶9

1/3

¶10

W.P.(MD)No.17346 of 2016

¶11

For Petitioner: Mr.S.Malaikani

¶12

For R1 to R4 : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R5 to R8 : Mr.S.Lakshmanan

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This writ petition has been filed to direct the Respondents 1 & 2 to conduct detailed enquiry, with regard to the practice of excommunication, on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 21.04.2016 and to provide police protection to the petitioner and his family members.

¶15

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 would submit that on the representation given by the petitioner dated 21.04.2016, a case has been registered in Crime No.57 of 2016 for the punishable offences under Sections 147, 148, 294 (b), 354 and 506 (ii) of IPC r/w Section 4 of Women Harassment Act r/w Section 3 (1) of the TNPPDL Act. After completion of investigation, the third respondent police, closed the same as 'mistake of fact'.

¶16

In view of the above submission, the prayer sought for in the writ petition cannot be considered. Therefore, the present writ petition is devoid of merits. It is liable to be dismissed.

¶17

Accordingly this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶18

// True Copy //

¶19

/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶20

dss

¶21

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶22

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

¶23

2/3

¶24

W.P.(MD)No.17346 of 2016

¶25

¶26

1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul. 3.The Inspector of Police, Eriodu Police Station, Dindigul District. 4.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kujiliyamparai Police Station, Dindigul District. W.P.(MD)No.17346 of 2016 24.11.2019 BK(CO) NR (07/12/2020) 3P : 5C

¶27

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

¶28

3/3

A.Murugesan, S/O.Arumuga v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Murugesan, S/O.Arumuga v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Mohanraj Vs The Inspector of Police

V.P.Devanandan Vs The Inspector of Police

S.Baskaran Vs The Inspector of Police

R.Rajapandi Vs The Inspector of Police

Sharpudeen, Vs the Superintendent of Police

Ganesan Vs the Superintendent of Police