R.Narayanasamy, Vs the Inspector of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

R.Narayanasamy, Vs the Inspector of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Instead of granting standing police protection, the Court directed the petitioner to lodge a complaint before the respondent Police whenever any threat is made to his prawn culture business, and directed that on receipt of such complaint the first respondent Police shall conduct an enquiry and take appropriate action in accordance with law. No costs; connected miscellaneous petition (W.M.P.No.16811 of 2024) closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed to provide protection to the petitioner for carrying on his prawn culture business in Puduthurai Village, Sirgazhi Taluk, Mayiladuthurai District.

Court's answer

This Court directed the petitioner to lodge a complaint before the respondent Police whenever any threat is made to his business.

Ratio / Principle

On receipt of such complaint, the first respondent Police shall conduct an enquiry and take appropriate action in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

The Writ Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid direction; no costs; the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Article 226, Constitution of India) by R.Narayanasamy seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the Inspector of Police, Thiruvenkadu Police Station, and the Tahsildar, Sirgazhi, to grant protection for prawn culture in ponds in S.Nos.1-8A, 5-2-1A, 7-1,8 (total 3.72 acres) in Puduthurai Village, Sirgazhi Taluk, Mayiladuthurai District. The petitioner held a valid licence from the Coastal Aquaculture Authority under the Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, but villagers obstructed the business; peace committee meetings were held by the respondents without any order being passed in the file. The Madras High Court (N. Sathish Kumar, J.) did not grant standing protection; it disposed of the petition directing the petitioner to lodge a complaint with the respondent Police whenever any threat is made, upon which the first respondent Police shall conduct an enquiry and take appropriate action in accordance with law. No costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

W.P.No.15470 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 22.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

W.P.No.15470 of 2024 and W.M.P.No.16811 of 2024

R.Narayanasamy

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Inspector of Police, Thiruvenkadu Police Station, Thiruvenkadu, Sirgazhi Taluk, Mayiladuthurai District.

The Tahsildar, Sirgazhi, Sirgazhi Taluk, Mayiladuthurai District. ... Respondents

PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to grant protection to the petitioner for doing prawn culture in the ponds located in S.Nos.1-8A, 5- 2-1A, 7-1,8 total acres 3.72 in Puduthurai Village, Sirgazhi Taluk, Mayiladuthurai District.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Baskar

For Respondents : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor

1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.15470 of 2024

O R D E R

The Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to provide protection to the petitioner for doing his prawn culture business.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents.

The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

is that the petitioner is carrying on prawn culture in Puduthurai Village, Sirgazhi Taluk, Mayiladuthurai District, after obtaining a valid licence from the Coastal Aquaculture Authority under the Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying. However, some of the villagers are preventing the petitioner from carrying on his business and in this regard, peace committee meetings were also conducted by the respondents. Nevertheless, no order

has been passed in the file relating to the committee. Therefore, the petitioner filed the present petition seeking police protection.

In view of the above, this Court directs the petitioner to lodge a

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.15470 of 2024

complaint before the respondent Police whenever any threat is made to his

business. On receipt of such complaint, the first respondent Police shall conduct an enquiry and take appropriate action in accordance with law.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid direction. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

22.08.2025

ham Neutral Citation:Yes/No

To

The Inspector of Police, Thiruvenkadu Police Station, Thiruvenkadu, Sirgazhi Taluk, Mayiladuthurai District.

The Tahsildar, Sirgazhi, Sirgazhi Taluk, Mayiladuthurai District.

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.15470 of 2024

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

ham

W.P.No.15470 of 2024 and W.M.P.No.16811 of 2024

22.08.2025

4/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis