M.R.Krishnan v. The District Collector

ORDER This Writ Petition (Criminal) has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 6 to provide adequate police protection to the petitioners and their family members and also to safeguard the petitioner's land comprised in Survey Nos.215, 215/8, 215/11, 215/12, 216/1, 216/2, 216/2A, 216/2A1, Page3 of 6 216/A2, 218/1D, 218/2, 219/2D, 78/1, 77/1, 77/3, 77/4, 77/4A, 77/4B, situated at Tarapuram, Chikkanampatti Village, Kadayampatti Taluk, Salem.

¶2Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 6. Perused the materials available on record.

¶3The petitioners were in need of financial assistance of Rs.10 lakhs for the development of their business. While being so, the 8th and 9th respondents frequently visited them under the pretext of arranging a loan and representing that the 7th respondent was close to them and that the loan could be availed by mortgaging the agricultural land owned by the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners agreed to mortgage their land to raise a loan from the 7th respondent. However, instead of executing a mortgage deed, the petitioners executed sale deeds as security in favour of the 7th respondent to avail the loan, in which the 8th and 9th respondents stood as witnesses. The 7th respondent also assured that as and when the loan amount was repaid, he will execute a sale deed in favour of the petitioners. While the market value of the said property is worth about Rs.40 crores, the 7th respondent paid only a sum of Rs.2,50,62,640/- and the remaining sale consideration was not paid. Subsequently, the 7th respondent executed sale deeds in favour of the 10th respondent. Consequently, the respondents 7 to 10 attempted to take physical Page4 of 6 possession of the subject property from the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners have sought police protection.

¶4Admittedly, the petitioners have already executed sale deeds in favour of the 7th respondent and in turn, the 7th respondent executed sale deeds in respect of the subject property in favour of the 10th respondent. That apart, the petitioners have already filed a suit in O.S.No.542 of 2026 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Salem, seeking a declaration to declare the sale deeds executed in favour of the 7th respondent and the subsequent sale deeds executed in favour of the 10th respondent as null and void. Hence, the petitioners rightly approached the Civil Court for appropriate relief.

¶5In view of the above, the prayer sought for in this petition with regard to the police protection cannot be granted. Thus, the writ petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Writ Petition (Criminal) stands dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the Civil Court for appropriate relief. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs. 03-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order LPP Page5 of 6 To

1.The District Collector Office of the District Collectorate, Salem.

2.The District Superintendent of Police, Nethimedu, Salem-636002.

3.The District Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nethimedu, Salem-636002.

4.The Inspector of Police, Deevattipatti police station, Salem district-636305.

5.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Foreshore Estate, Chennai-600 028.

6.The Sub-Registrar, Salem district-636351.

7.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Page6 of 6 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN J. LPP and WPMP CRL. Nos.544 and 545 of 2026 03-07-2026

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 03-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN and WPMP CRL. Nos.544 and 545 of 2026 1. M.R.Krishnan S/o.Ramanna Gounder, No.19, Ramasamy nagar, Narasothipatty, Salem-4. 2. M.P.Govindaraj S/o.Palaniyappan, No.56/113, Rajaji Street, Sundara Apartments, Salem-7. ..Petitioners Vs 1. The District Collector Office of the District Collectorate, Salem. 2. The District Superintendent of Police, Nethimedu, Salem-636002. 3. The District Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nethimedu, Salem-636002. 4. The Inspector of Police, Deevattipatti police station, Salem district-636305. Page2 of 6 5. The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Foreshore Estate, Chennai-600 028. 6. The Sub-Registrar, Salem district-636351. 7. A.Mohammed Kasim 8. Arumugam 9. Murugesan 10.K.Dhanasekar ..Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition (Criminal) filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 6 to provide adequate police protection to the petitioners and their family consequently to save, safeguard the land of the petitioners comprised in Survey Nos.215, 215/8, 215/11, 215/12, 216/1, 216/2, 216/2A, 216/2A1, 216/A2, 218/1D, 218/2, 219/2D, 78/1, 77/1, 77/3, 77/4, 77/4A, 77/4B, situated at Tarapuram, Chikkanampatti Village, Kadayampatti Taluk, Salem. For Petitioners: Mr.P.Kumaresan, Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Elumalai For Respondents: Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) for R1 to R6