Police protection is not warranted when claims of threat are found exaggerated, particularly for individuals with a criminal background or due to self-inflicted rivalries.

ORDER

The petitioner, who is the President of Adhanur Panchayat, submitted a representation dated 12.02.2026 to the Commissioner of Police, Tambaram, objecting to the withdrawal of Police protection on 10.02.2026 without prior notice and seeking for continuation of Police protection.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that he belongs to DMK party and he is also the president of Adhanur Panchayat. His wife Malarvizhi Tamilamuthan, also belongs to DMK party and she is a member of Kundrathur Panchayat Union. The petitioner runs a Company, namely, Classic Service Private Ltd. supplying workers on contract basis. The petitioner is doing this business for more than 30 years and he is having around 10,000 employees under him. Due to political rivalry, he had been constantly threatened. Within few days of him taking over as the president, LED lights, which he had installed, were damaged and in this regard he lodged a complaint on 15.11.2021. He also faced disputes in supplying labourers to a Sweet Confectionery Industry. Further, the former MLA of Poonmallee had a tiff with him and he was attempted to be assaulted. On the petitioner's complaint, a case in Crime No.453 of 2022 was registered. On 20.01.2023, the petitioner's Bolero Car, which was parked near Ellai Amman Koil, was set on fire.

3. Despite these incidents, the petitioner has been continuing his political activities and successfully doing his business activities. This created rivals and he had been targeted. The petitioner due to paucity of time could not get trained in shooting and hence he could not apply for gun licence but his son-in-law had obtained gun licence. While that being so, on 10.02.2026, without prior notice, the Police Guard provided to him was withdrawn. The petitioner still apprehends threat to his life and property and hence, prays for Police protection to be restored and he is ready to pay necessary charges.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed a counter giving reasons for withdrawal of the Police Force. It is stated that the Intelligence Section of Tambaram City Police, had assessed the threat perception and found that the petitioner's claim is imaginary and no such situation is prevailing as stated by the petitioner. Hence, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Tambaram vide his proceedings C.No.1/DC-TMB/Proc/2025, dated 27.02.2026 had withdrawn the Armed PSO entrusted to the petitioner.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that due to the ensuing general elections, the Police force is dearth of men. Further the over all security situation is being properly assessed and there have been regular routine checks and Armed Forces have been deployed in sensitive areas and proper security arrangements have been made through out the State to avert any untoward incident and conduct free and fair election. At this stage, the petitioner's prayer cannot be considered and further there is no death perception as projected by the petitioner.

6. The counter filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Manimangalam Range, Tambaram District is extracted hereunder:

“COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, MANIMANGALAM RANGE, TAMBARAM POLICE DISTRICT I, M.G. Sundar, aged 59 years, S/o. M. Gnanasekaran presently working as Assistant Commissioner of Police, Manimangalam Range of Tambaram Police District, Tambaram City Police do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows.

2. I respectfully submit that I am well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the petition from the records available to me and hence I am filing this Counter Affidavit. The prayer of the petitioner is that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to DIRECT the respondent/the Co