M. Brammamoorthy Vs the Superintendent of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

M. Brammamoorthy Vs the Superintendent of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No mandamus was issued; the writ petition was disposed of without costs and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed, with the Court recording that police cannot interfere in the civil dispute except law and order issues and that the parties' rights fall to be decided before the Civil Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 3 and 4 (Inspector and Sub-Inspector of Police, Magudanchavadi Police Station) can be restrained by way of a Writ of Mandamus from interfering with the petitioner's lawful business (Dhanalashmi Textiles), in light of the civil dispute between the petitioner and the 7th respondent and the FIR registered against the petitioner.

Court's answer

Police have no right to interfere in a civil dispute except where a law and order issue arises.

Ratio / Principle

The rights of the petitioner and the 7th respondent are to be decided before the Civil Court.

Key takeaways

The final report filed based on the FIR against the petitioner is totally independent of the writ proceedings, being founded on the materials collected during the investigation.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (W.P.No.18930 of 2025 & WMP.No.21220 of 2025, decided 18.08.2025 by N. Sathish Kumar J.). The petitioner, claiming title through an agreement for sale dated 24.08.2022, a suit (O.S.No.427 of 2003, Principal District Judge, Salem) decreed in his favour, and a registered sale deed (Doc.No.4287/2024, SRO Magudanchavadi), sought a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 forbearing respondents 3 and 4 (Inspector and Sub-Inspector, Magudanchavadi Police Station) from interfering with his lawful business, Dhanalashmi Textiles. The Additional Public Prosecutor stated the police were not interfering with possession, that an FIR had been registered on the complaint of the 7th respondent (Ravichandran), and that a final report had been filed against the petitioner. Observing that the allegations indicate a civil dispute, the Court held that police have no right to interfere in a civil dispute except law and order issues, that the rights of the petitioner and the 7th respondent are to be decided before the Civil Court, and that the final report is independent, being based on materials collected during investigation. The writ petition was disposed of without costs and the connected miscellaneous petition closed.

WP.No.18930 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

W.P.No.18930 of 2025 & WMP.No.21220 of 2025

M.Brammamoorthy

.. Petitioner

Versus

1.The Superintendent of Police District Police Office Sankari Main Road Netthimedu, Salem

The Deputy Superintendent of Police Sankagiri Range Salem District

3.The Inspector of Police Magudanchavadi Police Station Salem District

4.The Sub-Inspector of Police Magudanchavadi Police Station Salem District

5.Senthilkumar

6.Anandhan

7.Ravichandran .. Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents 3 and 4 from interfering into the petitioner's lawful business namely Dhanalashmi Textiles in Registration No.Udyam-TN20-0020621, situated at Door No.7-1/159, Pattappan Kovil Street, Ilampillai Salem – 637 502.

1/4

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

WP.No.18930 of 2025

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Kumarasamy For Respondents : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan for R1 to R4 Additional Public Prosecutor R5 & R6- No appearance Mr.R.Krishnasamy for R7

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed forbearing the respondents 3 and 4

from interfering into the petitioner's lawful business namely Dhanalashmi Textiles in Registration No.Udyam-TN20-0020621, situated at Door No.71/159, Pattappan Kovil Street, Ilampillai Salem – 637 502.

According to the petitioner, he has entered an agreement for sale dated 24.08.2022 in respect of 4/5 shares with the legal heirs of one Raja to an extent of 1.38 acres for a valuable sale consideration of Rs.12 lakhs and Rs.10 lakhs was paid as advance. Based on the sale agreement, suit was filed in O.S.No.427 of 2003 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Salem. The said suit was decreed in his favour and ultimately, sale deed is executed in his favour and the same is registered in his favour in Doc.No.4287/2024 on the file of the SRO, Magudanchavadi and he is in the possession of the property. Now, it is the grievance of the petitioner that at the instigation of the 7^th respondent, the respondents 5 and 6 are interfering with the lawful possession. Hence, this writ petition.

2/4

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

WP.No.18930 of 2025

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the respondent police is not interfering with the possession.

They have registered the FIR based on the complaint given by the 7^th respondent.

Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record. The nature of the allegations found in the FIR and the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner indicate that there is a civil dispute. Though the petitioner claims to be a purchaser through Court, the fact remains that the FIR is registered as against the petitioner. Be that as it may, police has no right to interfere in a civil dispute except the law and order issue. The rights of the petitioner and the 7^th respondent can be decided before the Civil Court. It is also stated by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor final report is also filed based on the FIR as against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that it is totally independent based on the materials collected during the investigation.

In view of the above, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.

18.08.2025

dhk Index :Yes/No

3/4

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

WP.No.18930 of 2025

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

dhk

To,

1.The Superintendent of Police District Police Office Sankari Main Road Netthimedu, Salem

The Deputy Superintendent of Police Sankagiri Range Salem District

3.The Inspector of Police Magudanchavadi Police Station Salem District

4.The Sub-Inspector of Police Magudanchavadi Police Station Salem District

W.P.No.18930 of 2025

18.08.2025

4/4

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