1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 30.11.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Crl.O.P.(MD).No.15649 of 2011 G.Ilango ...Petitioner -Vs- 1. The Inspector General of Police South Zone Madurai 2. The Commissioner of Police Madurai City Madurai 3. The Inspector of Police S.S.Colony Police Station Madurai City ...Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to give necessary police protection to the petitioner and his family members life and liberty by considering his representation dated 25.11.2011. *** For Petitioner : Mr.R.Gandhi for Mr.M.Ajmal Khan For Respondents : Mr.P.Kannithevan Government Advocate (Crl. Side) O R D E R This Petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking to direct the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to give necessary police protection to the petitioner and his family members life and liberty by considering his representation dated 25.11.2011. 2. Heard Mr.R.Gandhi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.Kannithevan, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the State. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the petitioner is a real estate mediator by profession. One Rajendran and Narayanamoorthy were running a real estate office under the name and style of Star City Land Developers. They used to get monthly installments from public and thereafter they have to register the sale deed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 for the land already identified by the people. When the matter stood thus without any intimation, the said persons in order to cheat the pubic, had renamed their business as Vijaya Iyswaryam Engineering Company and shifted their office from Gnayolipuram to Thirunagar. He would also submit in his argument that for the past four years, the petitioner has identified several lands in and around Thirumangalam and acted as mediator to the accused and after registration, the accused persons neither gave the commission amount nor properly registered the property to the public. He would also submit in his argument that on 22.11.2011, the accused persons, viz., Narayanamoorthy and Parthiban had came to the petitioner's house and threatened the petitioner that they have already murdered 15 persons and again, he came to the house of the petitioner on 24.11.2011 and threatened that they will set fire on the entire family. He would further submit in his argument that on 25.11.2011, the petitioner has sent a representation to the respondents, but no action has been taken so far and if for any reason, the petitioner and their family members are not given with any protection by the respondent police, there may be a threat to the life and limb of the petitioner and their family members and therefore, he would request the Court that the petitioner and their family members may be given police protection for their life and limb. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit in his argument that the respondent police is always duty bound to protect every citizen's life and limb and the petitioner's apprehension that the said Narayanamoorthy and Parthiban are inimical towards the petitioner and their family members on the basis of the civil dispute and if there is an element of truth in the apprehension of the petitioner, the respondent police would give police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and their family members also. Therefore, he would request the Court to pass suitable orders. 5. I have given anxious thoughts to the arguments advanced on either side. 6. The documents produced by the petitioners, in the form of typed set of papers would go to show that there was a dispute in between the petitioners and the said Narayanamoorthy and Parthiban in respect of the civil dispute. The apprehension on the part of the petitioner would be that the said Narayanamoorthy and Parthiban are still inimical towards the petitioner. No doubt, the petitioner's apprehension could be sustained. 7. The respondent police is also willing to provide protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and their family members. Therefore, this Court is convinced to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to provide police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and their family members. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 8. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to provide police protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and their family members. With the above direction, this Petition is ordered. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(C.O) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1. The Inspector General of Police South Zone Madurai 2. The Commissioner of Police Madurai City Madurai 3. The Inspector of Police S.S.Colony Police Station Madurai City 4. The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai +One cc to Mr.M.Ajmalkhan, Advocate, SR.No.42399 vsg rl/6c – 15.12.2011 Crl.O.P.(MD).No.15649 of 2011 30.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/