Dismissed¶28

Lumina v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC25 Jun 2026WP Crl./1476/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; WP Crl. No. 1476 of 2026; G.K. Ilanthiraiyan J.; writ of mandamus; police protection; Article 226 Constitution of India; civil dispute; Survey No.156/5; patta cancellation; W.P.No.5395 of 2026; Divisional Revenue Officer Kanchipuram; Tahsildar Sriperumbudur; representation dated 17.03.2026; petition dismissed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Because a civil dispute is pending between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent in respect of the property, the petitioner ought to have approached the civil court as against the 3rd respondent in order to protect her property. ¶27

Lumina Vs The Superintendent of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

WP Crl. No. 1476 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 25-06-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN WP Crl. No. 1476 of 2026

¶6

Lumina

¶7

W/o.Arokiyaswamy, No.144/4, Saverior Street, Pannur Village, Thiruvallur Taluk and District.

¶8

..Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

The Superintendent of Police, Kanchipuram District.

¶11

The Inspector of Police, Sunguvarchatram Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

¶12

Balaraman S/o.Raju Naicker, New No.3/35, Old No.4/87, VOC Street, Thirumullai Nagar, Chennai - 89.

¶13

..Respondent(s)

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition Criminal filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 2^nd respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 17.03.2026 and grant police protection to the petitioner and his property, within time frame fixed by this Court.

¶15

For Petitioner(s): Mr.P.Arumugavel For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar for R1 & R2 Counsel for Government of Tamilnadu (Crl.Side)

¶16

Page1 of 4

¶17

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

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

WP Crl. No. 1476 of 2026

¶20

This Petition has been filed to direct the 2^nd respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 17.03.2026 seeking for police protection to the petitioner and her property.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and perused the entire documents placed on record.

¶22

It is to be noted that there is a civil dispute pending between the petitioner and the 3^rd respondent in respect of the property comprised in Survey No.156/5 to an extent of 0.48 cents situated at Kanthur Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District. In fact, already the petitioner approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No.5395 of 2026 to cancel the patta issued in favour of the 3^rd respondent in respect of the above mentioned property and this Court by an order dated 19.02.2026 in W.P.No.5395 of 2026 directed the Divisional Revenue Officer, Kanchipuram to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law. Thereafter, the Tahsildar, Sriperumbudur Taluk has also recommended to the Regional Divisional Officer, Sriperumbudur Division to cancel the patta issued in favour of the 3^rd

¶23

__________ Page2 of 4

¶24

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

¶25

WP Crl. No. 1476 of 2026

¶26

respondent, while being so, the petitioner has come up with the present petition seeking police protection.

¶27

In view of the above said discussions, the petitioner ought to have approached the civil court as against the 3^rd respondent in order to protect her property, therefore, the police protection sought for in this petition cannot be granted to the petitioner to enjoy the property.

¶28