1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P(MD)No.8029 of 2011 Subramaniyan @ Raju .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Director General of Police, Office of Director General of Police, Beach Road, Chennai- 600002. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District. 3.Rathakrishnan, Inspector of Police, Vikkirasingapuram Police Station, Ambasamuthiram Taluk, Tirunelveli District. .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent No.1 to initiate necessary action against the respondent No.3 on the basis of the representation preferred by the petitioner dated 11.07.2011, consequently directing the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to initiate necessary action to recover original house property deed document belongs to the petitioner's father now under the custody of the respondent No.3 and hand over the same to the petitioner's father. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Alagumani For Respondents : Mr.R.Anandha Raj Govt. Advocate O R D E R This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the first respondent Director General of Police to initiate necessary action against the third respondent on the basis of the representation preferred by the petitioner dated 11.07.2011 to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to initiate necessary action to recover the original house property deed/document belongs to the petitioner's father which is said to be in the custody of the third respondent Inspector of Police. 2. Heard Mr.R.Alagumani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Anandha Raj, learned Government Advocate, who takes notice for the respondents. 3. By consent, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final hearing. 4. According to the petitioner, he used to purchase paddy from one Anthoni Raj, S/o.Francis. The petitioner states that he purchased paddy https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 from one Balachandran from Mannarkudi and he paid the entire sale transaction and the said person demanded more money. 5. According to the petitioner the said Balachandran in collusion with Anthoni Raj, S/o.Francis, gave a false complaint to the third respondent Inspector of Police against the petitioner and his father and in the course of enquiry, they demanded some amount as settlement in the paddy purchase transaction. 6. According to the petitioner, he has filed a suit in O.S.No.138 of 2011 before the Additional District Munsif Court, Ambasamuthiram, Tirunelveli District, initially against Balachandhran and thereafter, the said Anthoniraj has also been impleaded in the civil suit. 7. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that on 09.07.2011 at about 5 a.m., the third respondent along with the Sub- Inspector of Police trespassed into the house of the petitioner and they forcibly took the petitioner to the police station and thereafter, at about 12.00 noon, the father of the petitioner was also asked to come to the police station. It is further alleged that the third respondent compelled the petitioner's father to hand over the original house property deed/ document and he was also asked to execute an agreement in twenty rupees stamp paper. On 09.07.2011, the petitioner was subjected to hardship and threat to life. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that on 09.07.2011, the petitioner has sent a letter to the Chief Minister Cell, the District Collector and to the second respondent Superintendent of police, complaining about the third respondent. Since no action has been taken so far, the present Writ petition has been filed. 9. On notice, the third respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit, wherein it is stated that Anthoni Raj gave a complaint on 02.06.2011 which was registered as CSR.No.305 of 2011 and enquiry was conducted on 04.06.2011. He further states that initially the parties compromised the dispute among themselves and thereafter, the petitioner filed the suit in O.S.No.138 of 2011 and in view of the same, recording the fact that both the parties are dealing in sale and purchase of paddy and since the petitioner has filed a suit with regard to the claim of the said Anthoni Raj, the third respondent closed the case on 14.06.2011 recording as above. 10. The third respondent has produced the originally case diary before this Court and the statement of Anthoni Raj has also been produced before this Court, wherein it is stated that no action need to be passed on the complaint. The third respondent has also denied the allegation with regard to the incident said to be taken place on 09.07.2011 stating that it is the story concocted by the petitioner. 11. There is a complaint made by the wife of the petitioner but from the perusal of the record, it is not clear that as to whether there was any document forcibly taken from the petitioner or his father by the third respondent. The petitioner has failed to state the nature and identity of the property or the document said to be taken into custody by the third respondent. Even copy of the plaint in the civil suit in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 O.S.No.138 of 2011 has not been produced, the only document enclosed in the typed set of papers, is I.A.No.671 of 2011 (a photo copy) that is an application to implead Anthoni Raj in the suit. 12. The petitioner's complaint is vague and not supported by any documents. This Court is not inclined to direct the first respondent or the second respondent to consider the representation as against the third respondent merely on the basis of bald and wild allegations. 13. The request in this Writ petition to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to recover the original house property deed document said to be in the custody of the third respondent, is also not supported by any materials, except bald allegations. The petitioner has not chosen to give the details of the property, its document number, the date of purchase etc. 14. The petitioner himself does not state anything about the document and has not enclosed any document in the typed set of papers. The entire exercise of the petitioner appears to be to avoid his liability as against the claim of the said Anthoni Raj, who preferred the complaint before the police for non payment. 15. There appears to be no material to support the plea that the third respondent has in fact exceeded his jurisdiction. The one other factor which is relevant in the case is that a civil suit has been filed earlier and the implead application has been filed on 14.06.2011, the date on which the case was closed as per the records produced by the third respondent before this Court. Therefore, the allegation of police excess or trespass by the third respondent on a subsequent date appears in the nature of fiction. 16. When the parties have already approached the civil Court, it is not clear that as to why the petitioner wants to bring the third respondent into the picture. The statements made in the affidavit filed in support of this Writ petition, is devoid of particulars, vague and not supported by the material facts. Relevant documents have also not been enclosed. The bald allegations made against the third respondent, will not give rise to a cause of action to file the Writ Petition. No direction is requested to be given to respondents 1 and 2 to take action against the third respondent. There is absolutely no merits in the claim of the petitioner. 17. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, considering the plea of the petitioner, taking a lenient view, this Court is not inclined to impose any cost. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 To 1.The Director General of Police, Office of Director General of Police, Beach Road, Chennai- 600002. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District. 3.Rathakrishnan, Inspector of Police, Vikkirasingapuram Police Station, Ambasamuthiram Taluk, Tirunelveli District. +1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.NO.25894 +1cc to Mr.R.Alagumani, Advocate, SR.No.26373 pm GH : 19.08.2011 : 4p/6c W.P.(MD)No.8029 of 2011 02.08.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/