Disposed

S.Pannerselvam v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC2 Jun 2021CRL OP(MD)/6359/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition under Section 482 CrPC sought police protection against encroachers who assaulted the petitioner. The court directed the police to consider the petitioner's representation within four weeks and disposed of the petition without granting immediate protection.

What did the court decide?

Direction to police to consider petitioner's representation for protection within four weeks. Petition disposed.

S.Pannerselvam Vs The Superintendent of Police — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Crl.O.P(MD)No.6359 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 02.06.2021

¶4

CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN

¶5

Crl.O.P(MD)No.6359 of 2021

S.Pannerselvam

... Petitioner

1.The Superintendent of Police Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

¶10

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

¶11

3.The Inspector of Police, Memesal Police Station, Pudukottai District.

¶12

4.Sekar

¶13

5.Subramanian 6.Govindan

¶14

7.Selvam

¶15

8.Dhanush ... Respondents

¶16

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the third respondent to give a police protection for the petitioner's life and limb as well as to enter into his property in survey No.63/1, situated at Nattani Purasakudi, Memesal, Pudukottai, based on the petitioner's representation, dated 25.03.202 and 16.03.2021 in accordance with law.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Susikumar For R1 to R3 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the third respondent to give police protection to the petitioner's life and limb as well as to enter into his property in survey No.63/1, situated at Nattani Purasakudi, Memesal, Pudukottai, based on the petitioner's representation, dated 25.03.202 and 16.03.2021.

¶20

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the owner of the above mentioned property. Since https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶21

1/3

¶22

Crl.O.P(MD)No.6359 of 2021

¶23

the respondents 4 to 8 have encroached the petitioner's property, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.(MD) No.6191 of 2021 and the same is still pending. In the meantime, the respondents 4 to 8 have came to know about the writ petition filed by the petitioner and brutally assaulted the petitioner with deadly weapons. Hence, the petitioner made a complaint, based on that, a case was registered in Crime No.129 of 2021 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(i) of IPC. Even thereafter, the respondents 4 to 8 continuously threatening the petitioner. Hence, he made a complaint before the respondents 1 to 3 on 25.03.2021. Since the respondents 1 to 3 have not taken any action, the petitioner is before this Court seeking police protection.

¶24

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, on instructions, would submit that the representation of the petitioner, dated 25.03.2021 will be considered by the respondents 1 to 3.

¶25

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3.

¶26

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents 1 to 3 are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 25.03.2021 by following the due process of law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶27

6.With the above direction, this criminal original petition is disposed of.

¶28

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.

¶29

To:-

¶30

1.The Superintendent of Police Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

¶31

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

¶32

2/3

¶33

Crl.O.P(MD)No.6359 of 2021

¶34

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

¶35

3.The Inspector of Police, Memesal Police Station, Pudukottai District.

¶36

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶37

Crl.O.P(MD)No.6359 of 2021

¶38

02.06.2021 AS(11.06.2021)3P 5C

¶39

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

¶40

3/3

S.Pannerselvam v. The Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Pannerselvam v. The Superintendent 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

A.Sanjeevi Gandhi Vs The Superintendent of Police

Prabu @ Prabakaran Vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police

G.Manoharan Vs The Superintendent of Police

P.Rajendran Vs R.M.K.R.Durairaj (Died)

Chinnu Vs The Superintendent of Police

Murugan.K Vs the City Commissioner of Police