Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 15151 Mad
Judgement Date : 28 November, 2023
W.A.(MD)No.2023 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 28.11.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
W.A.(MD)No.2023 of 2023
C.M.Samy ... Appellant
Vs.
1.The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Madurai Range, Madurai District.
2.The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City, Madurai.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Madurai District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, to set aside
the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.8699 of 2013, dated 11.09.2023 on the file of
this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.J.Vijayaraja
For Respondents : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar,
Additional Public Prosecutor
1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)No.2023 of 2023
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
This Writ Appeal has been instituted challenging the order dated
11.09.2023 passed in W.P.(MD)No.8699 of 2023.
2.The request of the writ petitioner, who is a practising Advocate and
Social activist, to provide police protection was rejected by the learned Single
Judge mainly on the ground that the respondent Police had filed detailed report,
showing number of criminal cases pending against the writ petitioner / practising
Advocate. The 3rd respondent filed status report, who is the authority to provide
police protection. The report says that the Police conducted inquiry in respect of
threat perception of the writ petitioner and found that there is no threat to his life
and liberty and declined to provide armed protection.
3.Pertinently, the writ petitioner himself is an accused in two criminal
cases. That being so, we do not find any error in arriving a conclusion for
rejection of the claim set out by the writ petitioner in the Writ proceedings.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4.Seeking police protection must be based on certain concrete reasons
during the enquiry by the Superintendent of Police. In the present case, the
Superintendent of Police, Madurai found that there is no threat perception
requiring police protection and that being the factum established, we are not
inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge, which is
impugned. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
(S.M.S., J.) & (V.L.N., J.)
28.11.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Yuva
To
1.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Madurai Range, Madurai District.
2.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
Yuva
28.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!