Arb.Apln.Nos.648 of 2024 P.B.BALAJI, J. The learned Advocate Commissioner has filed a report today, stating that despite locating and identifying the vehicle, the warrant could not be executed because of the political influence exercised by the respondent. The report also discloses that despite directions from the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tiruttani, for police protection and the same being forwarded to the Tiruttani Police Station, the vehicle could not be seized. The learned Advocate Commissioner therefore seeks suitable directions to be issued to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tiruttani, in this regard. 2.This Court, by order dated 04.10.2024, appointed the Advocate Commissioner to seize the vehicle. It is unfortunate that the respondent has been influential enough to move the vehicle away from the jurisdiction of this Court, despite specific direction issued by this Court to the Police Authorities to assist the Advocate Commissioner to execute the warrant in the presence of the police. Hence, there shall be a specific direction to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tiruttani, to ensure that sufficient police protection is accorded to the Advocate Commissioner to seize the vehicle by execution of the warrant as directed by this Court at from the respondent or at any place wherever it is found. 3.Post the matter after two weeks under the caption 'for reporting compliance'. 05.12.2024 ata https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis P.B.BALAJI, J. ata Arb.Apln.Nos.648 of 2024 05.12.2024 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis