THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO. 6344 OF 2006 BETWEEN: Smt.R.Annapurna Wife of R.Palaniswamy …Petitioner vs. The Supeintendent of Police, Chittor and another …Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO. 6344 OF 2006 ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home and perused the counter-affidavit filed by each of the respondents. The petitioner’s grievance is that that the complaint of the petitioner sent through the counsel on 26-03-2006 has not been registered. In the complaint the petitioner alleges that the 2nd respondent-a police officer at the instance of certain persons, named in the complaint, is threatening the petitioner that a false case would be foisted against her and she would be arrested. Protection is sought against those persons and the against the alleged illegal action of the 2nd respondent. The Superintendent of Police-1st respondent has filed a counter-affidavit stating that on 12-03-2006 15 persons had sent up a written complaint that they have given a certain amount/loan to the petitioner; that the petitioner refused and declined to repay the amount and that action should not be taken as it was fell that the complaint contained a matter essentially civil in nature, and those persons who advised to seek reddresal in a competent Civil Court and not for the police. The answering respondent-1st respondent further states that the police is ready and willing to provide police protection to her as and when required and that the petitioner never approached the respondent for providing police protection except by sending a legal notice. After sending the legal notice the petitioner never approached the respondents seeking police protection, is the assertion. The 2nd respondent’s counter-affidavit broadly reiterates the assertions in the 1st respondent’s counter-affidavit. Having considered the writ petition and the counter-affidavit in the considered view of this Court the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider any future application of the petitioner for police protection, in accordance with law. No order as to costs. __________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J 26th JUNE 2006 *TSNR