1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN W.P.(MD).No.1332 of 2011 and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2011 K.Rajendran ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. 2.The Inspector of Police, Watrap Police Station, Virudhunagar District. 3.M.C.Annamalai. ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents 1 & 2 from in any way harassing or threatening the petitioner in connection with the civil dispute which is the subject matter of O.S.No.13 of 2011 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Srivilliputhur. For petitioner : Mr.M.E.Ilango For respondents : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh, 1 & 2 Government Advocate ORDER The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the Police not to harass him or interfere in civil proceedings. 2.According to the petitioner, he has already filed a civil suit in O.S.No.13 of 2011 before the District Munsif, Srivilliputhur, against the third respondent praying for a decree of injunction. During the pendency of the said suit, the third respondent approached the second respondent and accordingly the respondents 1 & 2 have threatened him to remove the stone slab. This made the petitioner to file the writ petition. 3.The learned Government Advocate on instructions submits that the petitioner was summoned to the Police Station pursuant to the complaint made by the third respondent. However, the second respondent advised the parties to approach the civil Court to redress their grievances. Accordingly, the complaint was closed. The https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 learned Government Advocate further submits that there is no case pending against the petitioner before the Watrap Police Station. 4.The petitioner has already filed a civil suit in O.S.No.13 of 2011. The second respondent has submitted that it was only on account of the complaint preferred by the third respondent, he summoned the petitioner to the police station. In view of the submission of Police and their instructions to the parties to approach the concerned civil Court to redress their grievance, no further orders are necessary in the matter. 5.Accordingly, by recording the submission of the second respondent, the writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(Accounts) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. 2.The Inspector of Police, Watrap Police Station, Virudhunagar District. +1cc to Mr.M.E.Ilango, Advocate Sr.No.4712 +1cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR.No.4862 gcg akm/17.02.11 /2p-5c/ W.P.(MD).No.1332 of 2011 07.02.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/