S.Thirugnanam Vs The State of Tamilnadu, rep by The Superintendent of Police

PRAYER : Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to direct the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to give necessary police protection to the petitioner's life and limb based on his representation dated 07.02.2026.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Sheik Abdulla For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar (for R1 & R2)

¶15

Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Seeking a direction to the trespondent Nos.1 and 2 to give necessary

¶18

police protection to the petitioner's life and limb based on his representation dated 07.02.2026, this petition is filed.

¶19

1/5

¶20

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

¶21

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3374 of 2026

¶22

2. Since no adverse order is proposed to be passed against the third

¶23

respondent, notice to him is dispensed with.

¶24

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that earlier this petitioner had filed an application in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.613 of 2026 seeking police protection as against the third respondent herein. In the matter, where the third respondent had stolen the cultivated crops, in which, this Court vide order dated 12.01.2026 had disposed of the same directing the respondent police to issue notice under Section 62 of Cr.P.C./64 of BNSS, 2024 specifying the date, time and purpose of enquiry to both the petitioner as well as the third respondent. However, even the police failed to act on the same and the threat is still continuing and hence this petition.

¶25

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police submitted that after the order passed by this Court dated 12.01.2026, the third respondent trespassed into the land and harvested the paddy crops. Hence, the petitioner lodged a complaint. Based on which,the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.11 of 2026 against the third respondent and his family members. The claim of the petitioner that no action was taken is absolutely baseless.

¶26

2/5

¶27

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

¶28

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3374 of 2026

¶29

Heard the learned counsels on either side and carefully perused the materials available on record.

¶30

6.Pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 12.01.2026, in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.613 of 2026, the third respondent had removed the standing crops and agricultural produce from the petitioner’s agricultural land, and the police have duly registered an FIR in Crime No. 11 of 2026 against the third respondent.

¶31

7.Under such circumstances, the petitioner requires that a fence be put up around the agricultural land and it is only for that purpose that police protection is sought by way of this petition. Hence, the second respondent police are directed to afford necessary police protection for the purpose of putting up a fence in the said agricultural land, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the third respondent. The petitioner is directed to produce all necessary documents relating to title, and if the title is found to be in order, the second respondent police shall afford appropriate police protection to enable the petitioner to put up the fence, on payment of the requisite charges in terms of the G.O(Ms)No.139, Home (Pol~VIII) Department, dated 04.03.2019.

¶32

3/5

¶33

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

¶34

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3374 of 2026

¶35