Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

A.Jeyamurali vs The Superintendent Of Police on 8 October, 2025

                                                                                      W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1659 of 2025




                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                              DATED : 08.10.2025

                                                        CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

                                          W.P.Crl.(MD).No.1659 of 2025

                A.Jeyamurali                                                                  ... Petitioner

                                                                 Vs.

                1.The Superintendent of Police,
                  O/o. the Superintendent of Police,
                  Ramanathapuram District.

                2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
                  O/o.The Revenue Divisional Office,
                  Ramanathapuram District.

                3.The Tahsildar,
                  Tahsildar Office,
                  Ramanathapuram Taluk,
                  Ramanathapuram District.

                4.The Inspector of Police,
                  Kennikkarai Police Station,
                  Ramanathapuram District.

                5.S.Selvam                                                                 ... Respondents

                Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
                praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1
                and 4 to give adequate police protection for open the temple namely Arulmigu
                Idar Neeki Amman Kovil situated in Ramnagar Village, Pattanamkathan,

                1/5



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis             ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2025 06:25:22 pm )
                                                                                             W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1659 of 2025


                Ramanathapuram District and allow the petitioner and his clan members to
                worshiping the Temple under the supervision of the Arulmigu Idar Neeki
                Amman Temple's trust deed by considering the petitioner's representation dated
                11.08.2025 within the time stipulated by this Court.


                                  For Petitioner         : Mr.I.Pinaygash
                                  For R-1 & R-4          : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi
                                                           Additional Public Prosecutor

                                  For R-2 & R-3          : Mr.D.S.Nedunchezhian
                                                           Government Advocate(crl.side)

                                                               ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed for Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 and 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.08.2025 and provide adequate police protection to open the temple and allow the petitioner and his clan members to worship in Arulmigu Idar Neeki Amman Kovil situated in Ramnagar Village, Pattanamkathan, Ramanathapuram District.

2. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that there is a dispute between the petitioner, the fifth respondent and the other members; that there is a civil suit pending in O.S.No.32 of 2024 filed by the fifth respondent before the District Munsif Court, Ramanathapuram; and that police protection as sought for cannot be granted.

2/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2025 06:25:22 pm ) W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1659 of 2025

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner however would submit that though the fifth respondent has filed a suit claiming that he is the trustee of the temple, there is no interim order passed in his favour; that the action of the fifth respondent in locking the temple is illegal; and that an FIR was also registered against him.

4. This Court is of the view that the official respondents cannot interfere in such dispute between the petitioner and the fifth respondent. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any illegal action of the fifth respondent in locking the temple, it is always open to him to approach the Civil Court seeking appropriate remedy.

5. With the above observations, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.





                                                                                         08.10.2025
                NCC               : Yes / No
                Index             : Yes / No
                Internet          : Yes/ No
                Lm




                3/5



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2025 06:25:22 pm )
                                                                                     W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1659 of 2025



                To
                1.The Superintendent of Police,
                  O/o. the Superintendent of Police,
                  Ramanathapuram District.

                2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,

O/o.The Revenue Divisional Office, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

4.The Inspector of Police, Kennikkarai Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2025 06:25:22 pm ) W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1659 of 2025 SUNDER MOHAN, J.

Lm W.P.Crl.(MD).No.1659 of 2025 08.10.2025 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2025 06:25:22 pm )