IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL FRIDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2011 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 32193 of 2011(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. AYSHA BEEVI,AGED 58 YEARS, W/O.ALIKUNJU,VELIYIL PUTHEN PURAYIL, PADA NORTH CHERRY,KARUNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY P.O 2. NAJITHA A,AGED 32 YEARS, D/O.ALI KUNJU, ANAZIA MANZIL, PPADA NORTH CHERRY,KARUNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, KOLLAM 3. DILEEP,AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.RAVIKUMAR,PUTHENPURAYIL, PADANAGARKULANGARA NORTH MURI, KARUNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK BY ADV. SRI.P.SIVARAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY 690 518 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY 690 518 3. GOPAKUMAR, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY 690 518 4. ANSHAD N, VELIYIL PUTHEN PURAYIL, PADA NORTH KARUNAGAPPALLY 690 518 5. RASEENA, W/O.NAZAR, VELIYIL PUTHEN VEEDU, KARUNAGAPPALLY BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI..DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.32193/2010 APPENDIX PETITINERS EXHIBITS; EXT.P1: COPY OF THE WILL EXECUTED BY DECEASED ALIKUNJU IN FAVOUR OF THE 1ST PETITIONER AND HER SON NASSAR. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 28/11/2011 EXECUTED BY MR. NASSAR IN FAVOUR OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 28/11/2011 EXECUTED BY MR. NASSAR IN FAVOUR OF THE 3RD PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 29/11/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 26/11/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 28/11/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED TO MR. NASSAR BY THE KARUNAGAPPALLY GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO RUN FURNITURE SHOP. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE LICENCE ISSUED TO MR. NASSAR BY THE KARUNAGAPPALLY GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO RUN SAW MILL. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C) NO.32193 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioners- a mother, her daughter and an outsider, who claims to be the power of attorney holder of the first petitioner's son one Nassar, has filed this writ petition arraying the 3rd respondent - Sub Inspector of Police, Karunagappally eo-nominee Smt. Raseena-wife of Nazar, and Anshad-Nazar's son are the respondents. 2. The relief mainly sought for are issuance of police protection directions to the petitioners for the peaceful conduct of a saw mill and a furniture shop in the two buildings situated in one compound within the limits of Karunagappally Municipality. Yet another relief, which is sought for in the petition, is that a direction to the first respondent - Assistant Commissioner of Police, Karunagappally to conduct an enquiry into Ext.P4. Though no relief is separately sought for, Sri.P.Sivaraj learned W.P.(C) No. 32193/2011 2 counsel for the petitioners would submit that the same Assistant Commissioner of Police be directed to enquire into Ext.P5 where the allegations have been levelled against the 3rd respondent - Sub Inspector of Police, to the effect that he, being a police officer, is acting hands in glove with respondents 4 and 5 on extraneous considerations. 3. As directed by us, Sri.Dhanesh Mathew Manjooran learned Government Pleader has taken notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. We have heard him also. 4. Even though Sri.Sivaraj addressed us at length and drew our attention to the various averments in the writ petition and most of the documents placed on record, we are not persuaded to grant the protection sought for in respect of the peaceful conduct of the saw mill and the furniture shop. We are inclined to feel that some civil right is claimed by respondents 4 and 5 over the above furniture shop and saw mill. Redressal of any grievance pertaining to saw mill and the furniture shop may have to be sought either through process of a competent Civil Court including the family court. We relegate the petitioners to such remedy. W.P.(C) No. 32193/2011 3 5. We shall now deal with the other prayers including the oral prayer made by Mr.Sivaraj. In Ext.P4, it is alleged that the 4th respondent and his henchmen have threatened the petitioners ( petitioners 1 and 2 ) that they will be done away with. In Ext.P5 there is a very serious allegation that the 3rd respondent - Sub Inspector of Police, Karunagappally is pestering the petitioners 1 and 2, who are ladies, every now and then. We direct the 1st respondent to take up Exts.P4 and P5 and to conduct a detailed enquiry into the same. If the enquiry reveals that the allegations levelled in Ext.P5 against the 3rd respondent Sub Inspector of Police are true, the first respondent will be justified in recommending for initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the 3rd respondent. However, such recommendations will be made by the first respondent only after giving hearing opportunity to the 3rd respondent. 5. If the enquiry reveals that there is subsisting threat to the lives and limbs of the petitioners from the part of respondents 4 and 5, the first respondent will, either directly or through any police officer in whom he is having confidence, take requisite steps to ensure that lives and limbs of the petitioners W.P.(C) No. 32193/2011 4 are safe. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K.HARILAL, JUDGE. dpk W.P.(C) No. 32193/2011 5