Dismissed

Ramalingam v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC4 Apr 2022CRL OP(MD)/4337/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Criminal Original Petition seeking police protection was dismissed. The court directed the Second Respondent to investigate the registered FIR and prevent illegal eviction activities while civil proceedings were pending, but disposed of the petition regarding the protection prayer.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Second Respondent to investigate FIR Crime No.17 of 2022 and direct respondents 3 & 4 not to indulge in illegal eviction activities; petition disposed of.

Ramalingam Vs The Superintendent of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4337 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.04.2022 CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4337 of 2022

M.Ramalingam

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai City, Pudukkottai District.

¶8

2.The Inspector of Police, Pudukkottai Town Police Station, Pudukkottai District.

¶9

3.Abbas

¶10

4.Meharnisha Begum ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to give police protection for life and limb of the petitioner and his family members for running the flour mill shop located at Plot No.25, Rajavijayanagar, Pudukkottai Town in Pudukkottai District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 24.02.2022.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Mohammad Kasim For RR 1 & 2 : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For RR 3 & 4 : Mr.R.Gandhi

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to give police protection for life and limb of the petitioner and his family members for running the flour mill shop located at Plot No.25, Rajavijayanagar, Pudukkottai Town in Pudukkottai District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 24.02.2022.

¶15

2.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that on the complaint, dated 24.02.2022, the second respondent registered the F.I.R in Crime No.17 of 2022 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506 (ii) of I.P.C as against the respondents 3 and 4 herein.

¶16

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

¶17

1/3

¶18

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4337 of 2022

¶19

3.However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that in this regard two F.I.Rs have been registered as against the accused persons, even then, the petitioner was not permitted to run his flour mill. Further, the petitioner also filed a suit in O.S.No.61 of 2021 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Pudukkottai for injunction restraining the respondents 3 and 4 herein not to evict the petitioner without due process of law, which is also pending.

¶20

4.When the civil Court has taken the issue and also the F.I.R now registered on the complaint lodged by the petitioner as against the respondents 3 and 4 herein, the petitioner can very well approach the civil Court for appropriate remedy. Further, when the civil Court seized up the matter and the second respondent registered the F.I.R as against the respondents 3 and 4 herein, the respondents 3 and 4 are directed not to indulge in illegal activities to evict the petitioner without due process of law. The second respondent is directed to investigate the F.I.R and proceed further in Crime No.17 of 2022 for the offences under Sections 294 (b), 324 and 506(ii) of I.P.C.

¶21

5.With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

¶22

// True Copy //

¶23

¶24

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.

¶25

¶26

1.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai City, Pudukkottai District.

¶27

2.The Inspector of Police, Pudukkottai Town Police Station, Pudukkottai District.

¶28

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

¶29

2/3

¶30

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4337 of 2022

¶31

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

¶32

+1 CC to M/s.R. GANDHI, Advocate ( SR-16807[F] dated 06/04/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.S. MOHAMMAD KASIM, Advocate ( SR-16921[F] dated 06/04/2022 )

¶33

Crl.O.P(MD)No.4337 of 2022

¶34

04.04.2022

¶35

RD(18.04.2022) 3P 6C

¶36

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

¶37

3/3

Ramalingam v. The Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramalingam 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

Nagalakshmi Vs The Inspector of Police

Saroja Vs Rajathi

Sivaji Ganesan, Vs v.Baskaran, IPS

Arivuraj Vs Sivakandhan

N.Mohamed Farook Vs The Inspector of Police

P.Karthickraja Vs The Inspector of Police