Petitioner sought police protection to fence his land. The 2nd respondent (Inspector) refused due to pending civil appeal challenging the possession decree. The High Court held police protection cannot be granted while the appeal is pending and dismissed the petition.
Petition dismissed; no police protection granted due to pending appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.O.P.No.6342 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.06.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN
Crl.O.P.No.6342 of 2023
M.Kannan
... Petitioner
Vs.
3.Subramanian ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., directing the 2nd respondent namely the Inspector of Police, Keelkuppam Police Station, Kallakurichi District to give police protection to the petitioner to put up a fence around his land, which is mentioned in the complaint on the basis of the petitioner's complaint to the 2nd respondent dated 15.02.2023.
For Petitioner : Ms.T.Nithya
For R-1 & 2 : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For R3 : Mr.A.Ramesh
Page 1 of 4
Crl.O.P.No.6342 of 2023
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed for directing the 2 nd respondent namely the Inspector of Police, Keelkuppam Police Station, Kallakurichi District to give police protection to the petitioner to put up a fence around his land, which is mentioned in the complaint on the basis of the petitioner's complaint to the 2 nd respondent dated 15.02.2023.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, petitioner is the absolute owner of the property concerned in O.S.No.413 of 2012. Since petitioner's brother namely 3 rd respondent is obstructing the possession and enjoyment of the property, petitioner filed a Suit for declaration and possession. The Suit was decreed in favour of plaintiff on 30.10.2013. Petitioner also filed execution petition. Petitioner is in the possession of the property, eventhough execution petition is filed. Therefore, representation was given seeking police protection. However, respondent has not provided police protection, necessitating filing of this petition.
3. In reply, learned counsel for the 3 rd respondent submitted that, against the judgment and decree in O.S.No.413 of 2012, 3 rd respondent filed Appeal in A.S.No.73 of 2022 and it is pending on the file of Sub-Court, Kalakurichi. Page 2 of 4
Crl.O.P.No.6342 of 2023
4. Considered the submissions and perused the records.
5. It is seen from the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties
that, there are litigations both civil and criminal, pending between the petitioner and 3 rd respondent. Though petitioner succeeded in O.S.No.413 of 2012 filed for declaration and possession, now there is an Appeal pending against the judgment and decree. The Suit itself filed for declaration and possession, meaning that, petitioner is not in possession of the property. Therefore, petitioner's claim for police protection, when Appeal in A.S.No.73 of 2022 is pending, cannot be entertained.
6. In view of the above, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
23.06.2023
Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order gd
Page 3 of 4
Crl.O.P.No.6342 of 2023
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN.J.,
gd
To
Crl.O.P.No.6342 of 2023
23.06.2023
Page 4 of 4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petition for police protection can be entertained when a civil appeal against the possession decree is pending.
Can a Criminal Original Petition under Section 482 CrPC be entertained in a property dispute where title is sub judice?
M.Kannan
Superintendent of Police, Kallakurichi
Inspector of Police, Keelkuppam Police Station, Kallakurichi District
Subramanian
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
