K.Parasuraman Vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police - Dindigul — Madras HC (2026)

Seeking a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 01.06.2026, seeking police protection against the third respondent, this writ petition is filed.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the third respondent is an accused in a criminal case in which the petitioner has pledged 60 sovereigns of gold jewels with the third respondent aggreeing to pay interest on the same and had taken a loan amount of Rs.12,00,000/-, out of which the petitioner had already paid a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- on 26.03.2015 and 27.01.2021. Further, though the petitioner is willing to pay the remaining a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- with interest, the third respondent refused to receive the same. The present dispute has arisen to between the petitioner and the third respondent with regard to the redemption of jewels on payment of the remaining amount and the third respondent has atrociously tried to sell all the petitioner’s jewels. Hence, the petitioner sent a representation dated 01.06.2026 before the second respondent police station to take appropriate action against the third respondent. Since the same has not been considered, the 2/5

¶20

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

¶21

WP CRL.(MD). No.2979 of 2026

¶22

present writ petition is filed.

¶23

Heard both sides and perused the records.

¶24

Considering the limited relief sought for in this petition, notice

¶25

to the third respondent is dispensed with.

¶26

Considering the submissions made on either side, the second respondent police is directed to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 01.06.2026 by putting the petitioner as well as the third respondent

¶27

on notice as per Section 64 of B.N.S.S. and after giving proper opportunity to both the petitioner as well ad the third respondent, dispose of the representation of the petitioner within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶28

It is made clear that the petitioner should appear before the second respondent police by producing all necessary documents to substantiate his claim. Further, in the absence of such initiatives, the second respondent shall close the representation.

¶29

3/5

¶30

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

¶31

WP CRL.(MD). No.2979 of 2026

¶32