Madras High Court
CRL OP(MD)/24097/2026 of Izzur Rahman Bijili Vs The State of Tamilnadu on 11 November 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
CRL.O.P.(MD) No.24097 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011475162026}
Izzur Rahman Bijili
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep by it is the Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City, Tirunelveli.
2. The State of Tamil Nadu rep by
The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Tirunelveli Town Police Station, Tirunelveli City.
3. State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Tirunelveli Town Police Station, Tirunelveli City.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: This Petition filed under section Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, to direct the Respondents No.2 and 3 to provide adequate personal police protection to the petitioner by considering his representation dated 01.10.2026.
For Petitioner(s)
: Mr.M.Jagadeesh Pandian
For Respondent(s)
: Mr.P.Vetrivel
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The present petition has been filed seeking a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to provide adequate personal police protection to the petitioner, by considering his representation dated 01.10.2026.
2. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner is a witness in a Section 302 case, in which, his father has been done to death. Thereafter, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the accused persons in the said case are continuously threatening the petitioner and making attempts to commit murder of the petitioner and therefore, two First Information Reports have been registered in Crime Nos.342 of 2025 and 175 of 2026. The petitioner apprehends threat at the hands of the accused persons in Crime No.68 of 2025, in which, his father was done to death. The petitioner is shown as L.W.9 in the said case.
3. The respondents have filed counter affidavit. Paragraph Nos.(g) and (h) are extracted as follows” “g) As regards to the averments made in para 9 that, the Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City had issued a notice under section 51A of Madras City Police Act, 1888 to order the accused to move herself outside the Tirunelveli City and the same has been affixed in the visible place of her residence. Further it is respectfully submitted that, the respondent police had frequently watched the activities of the said accused in all the way. Further the respondent police kept on watching a sent police party to the accused house as Picketing. The Police Party has kept on stay at the Petitioner house in shift basic. Further the Police party had frequently visited the place of the Petitioner's house and made an entry in the Patta Book which is kept there. Hence the averments of the complainant stated that still the complainant and his mother facing the threatening from the accused is false.
h) As regards to the averments made in para 10 that, the said SC No. 527 of 2025 pending on the file of the Hon'ble IVth Addl District Judge, Tirunelveli is coming up on trial Stage and the said case is posted on 12.11.2026 on the stage of issued summons to the LW 1 to LW5. further any application filed by the accused and all the said application were decided immediately by the trial judge and no way to prolong the proceeding made by the accused. The said averments are all imaginary contention of the Petitioner. Further, I respectfully submit that the Respondent Police are willing to provide necessary protection to the Petitioner and his family members during the course of the trial, particularly when they appear before the Learned Court to depose as witnesses in the case.”
4. According to the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents, the petitioner is provided 24 hours security to his residential premises, whether the petitioner is found in the said premises or not. He would further submit that the petitioner would be provided adequate security for attending Court hearings. He would also submit that, on any other day, if the petitioner requires personal guard for himself to move in and around the city, it has to be only on the basis of payment of necessary charges, that is for a Head Constable for 24 hours, the charge would be Rs.4,326/- (Rupees Four Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty Six Only).
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, as and when he moves out, he will give prior intimation and he would utilise the services of the respondent Police on payment of necessary charges.
6. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to pass the following orders:
a) The respondent Police is directed to provide adequate Police security to the residential premises of the petitioner on all the days, on shift basis for 24 hours, without charging any fee.
b) The respondent Police is directed to provide personal security guard to the petitioner while he is attending Court hearings without insisting on any charges.
c) On any other day, if the petitioner wishes to go out of his residential premises, the petitioner shall be provided with personal security guard on payment of the necessary charges.
7. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of. 11-11-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No drm
To
1. The Commissioner of Police Tirunelveli City, Tirunelveli.
2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police Tirunelveli Town Police Station Tirunelveli City.
3. Inspector Of Police, Tirunelveli Town Police Station, Tirunelveli City.
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J. drm CRL OP(MD) No. 24097 of 2026 11-11-2026