1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.06.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2507 of 2011 Anthonysamy ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Alangudi, Pudukkottai District. 2.State Rep. by Sub Inspector of Police, Vadakadu Police Station,, Vadakadu, Pudukkottai District. 3.Krishnan ... Respondents (3rd respondent impleaded as per the order of this Court made in M.P.(MD) NO.1 of 2011 in Crl.O.P.(MD)NO.2507 of 2011, dated 16.06.2011) PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondents to give proper protection to the petitioner based on his representation to the respondents dated 11.01.2011. For Petitioner : Mr.G.R.Edmund For R - 1 and R - 2 : Mr.P.Kannithevan Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) For R -3 : Mr.P.Senthilkumar O R D E R This application is filed seeking for a direction, directing the respondents to give proper protection to the petitioner based on his representation to the respondents dated 11.01.2011. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.136 of 2010 against one Krishnan and mandatory injunction was granted for removal of encroachment if any committed by the defendant Krishnan in old Survey No.425/B2A and New Survey No.425/25 to an extent of 8.5 Acres and now the petitioner seeking police protection to execute the decree. 3. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent. 4. It is seen from the typed set of papers, the petitioner obtained a decree in O.S.No.136 of 2010 on the file of the learned District Munsif Court, Pudukkottai, by which mandatory injunction was granted for removal of any encroachment committed by the defacto complainant Krishnan in old Survey No.425/B2A and New Survey No.425/25. Admittedly, the petitioner has not filed any application for executing the decree and he straight away approached the police for police protection to execute the decree. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 5. According to me, in a suit for mandatory injunction, after obtaining decree, the petitioner, decree holder has to execute the decree and while applying for execution petition, the decree holder is also entitled to apply for police protection and also obtain suitable order from the Civil Court. Without filing the execution application and without getting any order for police protection, the decree holder cannot approach the police to give police protection in executing the decree for mandatory injunction. 6. In view of the above observation, this petition is disposed of. Sd/- Deputy Registrar /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Alangudi,Pudukkottai District. 2. The Sub Inspector of Police, Vadakadu Police Station,, Vadakadu,Pudukkottai District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, Madurai. +1cc to Mr.G.R.Edmund,Advocate, SR.No.18914 GH : 30.06.2011 : 2p/5c VSM Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2507 of 2011 16.06.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/