IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 34115 of 2008(J) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. A.P.SIVASANKARAN,KARTHIKA, POKKATTUPARAMBIL KEEZHVANMAZHI, PANDANAD, CHENGANNUR. 2. CHANDRAMATHI, W/O.SIVASANKARAN, KARTHIKA, POKKATTUPARAMBIL KEEZHVANMAZHI, PANDANAD, CHENGANNUR. 3. ANIL KUMAR, S/O.SIVASANKARAN KARTHIKA, POKKATTUPARAMBIL KEEZHVANMAZHI, PANDANAD, CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU SRI.A.R.EASWARLAL RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POICE, ALAPPUZHA. 2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR. 5. P.A.UNNIKRISHNAN, POKKATTUPARAMBIL KEEZHVANMAZHI, PANDANAD, CHENGANNUR. 6. OMANA UNNIKRISHNAN, W/O.P.A.UNNIKRISHNAN, POKKATTUPARAMBIL KEEZHVANMAZHI, PANDANADU, CHENGANNUR. W.P.(C) NO.34115/2008 7. P.A.PURUSHAN, POKKATTUPARAMBIL KEEZHUVANMAZHI, PANDANADU CHENGANNUR. 8. ADV.C.JAYACHANDRAN, THEKKADATHU KEEZHVANMAZHI, PANDANADU,CHENGANNUR. 9. M.K.SASIKUMAR, MANNURVEETTIL, KEEZHVANMAZHI PANDANADU, CHENGANNUR. 10. T.K.APPUKUTTAN-THOTTUNKONATH NOW RESIDING AT MANAKKUNNEL BUILDING NEAR PHC JN., KEEZHVANMAZHI, PANDANADU, CHENGANNUR. 11. P.K.GOPINATAHAPILLAI PLAKKATTUVEETTIL, KEEZHVANMAZHI, PANDANADU CHENGANNUR. 12. KESAVAN, ANNEESH BHAVAN, PARUVATHARA, KEEZHVANMAZHI, PANDANADU, CHENGANNUR. ADV. SRI.S.HARIKRISHNAN FOR R5 TO12 GOVT.PLEADER, SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.34115/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: EXT.P1: COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DT.5.2.2007 GRANTED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT. EXT.P2: COPY OF COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 21.10.2008. EXT.P3: COPY OF FIR NO.598/08 DT.21.10.2008. EXT.P4: COPY OF COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE KERALA ON 28.10.2008. EXT.P5: COPY OF COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 5.11.2008. RESPONDENT'S EXTS: EXT.R5(a): COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED NO.1143/1986 OF CHENGANNUR SUB REGISTRY. EXT.R5(b): COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.SNO.26/07 ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHENGANNUR. EXT.R5(c): COPY OF CRIME NO.599/08 OF CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION. EXT.R5(d): COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENTIN O.S.NO.26/07 FILED BY RESPONDENTS 5 AND 6. EXT.R5(e): COPY OF THE COUNTER CLAIM FILED BY RESPONDENTS 5 AND 6 BEFORE HON'BLE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHENGANNUR. EXT.R5(f): COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT IN O.S.NO.26/07 ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHENGANNUR. EXT.R5(g): COPY OF ENDORSEMENT RECORDED BY WOMEN'S CELL, ALAPPUZHA ON 18.11.2008. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 34115 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of November, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioners have approached this Court, seeking police protection for their lives and properties comprised in Re-survey No.319/13 in Pandanadu Village. The 1st petitioner is the husband of the 2nd petitioner and 3rd petitioner is his son. The 5th respondent is the brother of the 1st petitioner. There is a civil dispute between the petitioners and the 5th respondent regarding the existence of a pathway. The said dispute is pending decision in O.S.No.26/2007 filed by the 1st petitioner before the Munsiff's court, Chengannur. The said court has passed Ext.P1 interim order, restraining the respondents 5, 6 and 7 from trespassing into the plaint schedule property or laying a road through it or causing other damages. When the said injunction order was in force, the petitioners submit, the defendants in that suit along with a large group of local persons assembled before their residence on 21.10.2008 and physically W.P.(C) No.34115/2008 2 attacked them. Pursuant to the said incident, the 3rd petitioner was admitted in the hospital. Based on the statement of the 3rd petitioner recorded by the police, Ext.P3 crime has been registered. The 1st petitioner moved the Director General of Police by filing Ext.P4 representation, seeking protection to their lives and property. Thereafter, he has moved the District Superintendent of Police complaining that Ext.P3 F.I.R. was not properly recorded and actual culprits were excluded from the array of accused. Thereafter, this writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: “i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directions or order directing the respondents 1 to 4 to provide adequate and effective police protection for the life of the petitioners and also to their property comprised in Sy.No.319/13 in Pandanad village. ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directions or orders directing the respondents 5 to 12 or their men or anybody on their behalf not to cause any threat to life and property of the petitioner.” 2. Respondents 5 to 7 have filed a counter affidavit denying all the allegations against them. They submit, petitioners are trying to block an existing pathway available as per the partition deed, partitioning the properties of the family, a copy of which is produced as Ext.R5(a). The defendants in the suit filed by the 1st petitioner have raised a counter claim. Both W.P.(C) No.34115/2008 3 the matters are pending adjudication before the civil court. They also pointed out that Ext.R5(g) endorsement in the complaint register of Vanitha Police Station at Alappuzha would show that there is a genuine dispute between the parties regarding the pathway. 3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that based on the statement of the 3rd petitioner, a crime has been registered as per Ext.P3 and a counter case has been registered against the petitioners based on the information lodged by the 5th respondent. He also submitted that at present there is no law and order problem requiring protection to the lives of the petitioners. 4. The allegations against the respondents with reference to their commissions and omissions on 21.10.2008 will amount to violation of Ext.P1 interim order. If that be so, the 1st petitioner may move the civil court for appropriate reliefs for the violation of its order. The civil court can not only take coercive steps against the offenders but also can address the police, if found necessary, to enforce its orders. We also notice that the W.P.(C) No.34115/2008 4 petitioners have not moved the Station House Officer, complaining about the threat to their lives. Only a petition seeking protection to their lives has been filed before the Director General of Police, who is not a party in this writ petition. We also notice the submission of the learned Government Pleader that there is no situation warranting any protection to the lives of the petitioners. 5. In view of the above facts, we think that this is not a fit case, where this Court should invoke its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and order protection to the lives of the petitioners. If we make such an order, police protection can be misused to tilt the balance in the civil dispute. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners to move the concerned civil court for appropriate reliefs. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) ps