IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2008 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1929 Con.Case (C).No. 923 of 2007(S) -------------------------------------------- ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.8472/2007 DATED 29.3.2007 .................... PETITIONER: ------------------ SARGIS, S/O. ITTIMANI, AGED 60, KOCHAKKAN HOUSE, MARAKKAPARABIL, EAST OF KHANDAKARANAN VELI, KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE, PARAVUR. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ J. KURIAKOSE, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION, MOOTHAKUNNAM P.O., NORTH PARAVUR. ADDL.2. SIVADASAN, S/O.KUMARAN, PUTHENPURAKKAL, MALIANKARA DESOM, MOOTHAKUNNAM VILLAGE. 3. PRAKASAN, S/O.KUMARAN, PUTHENPURAKKAL, MALIANKARA DESOM, MOOTHAKUNNAM VILLAGE. 4. JOSHY, S/O.VASU, KALATHIPARAMBIL, MOOTHAKUNNAM. 5. SREEKANTH, S/O.RAJAPPAN, THAIKKOODAM, KOTTUVALLIKKAD. - 2 - 6. MURALEEKRISHNAN, S/O.KOCHUNNI, PUTHENPURAKKAL, MALIANKARA. 7. VIMAL, S/O.SIVADASAN, PUTHENPURAKKAL, MALIANKARA. 8. THE KERALA KSHETHRA SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHY, MALIANKARA BRANCH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY JOSHY, S/O.VASU, KALATHIPARAMBIL, MOOTHAKUNNAM. 9. SANTHOSH, S/O.NARAYANAN, VANCHIPURACKAL, KOTTUVALLIKKADU, MOOTHAKUNNAM. (ADDL.RESPONDENTS 2 TO 9 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 6.12.2007 IN I.A. NO.405 OF 2007) R1 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA R2, R3 & R6 BY ADV.SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE KIZHAKKAMBALAM SRI.N.J.MATHEWS R9 BY ADV. SRI.B.N.SHIVSANKAR THIS CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------ Cont. Case (C)No.923 of 2007-S ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 19th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. The complainant before us, alleges that the first respondent Sub Inspector of Police, Vadakkekkara Police Station, has deliberately and wilfully disobeyed the orders and directions issued by this Court in W.P.(C) No.8472 of 2007 dated 29th March, 2007. After service of notice of this contempt petition, the first respondent has filed several affidavits denying the allegations made in the contempt petition. 2. Today, yet another affidavit is filed by the Sub Inspector of Police. In that he has stated that the police will render police protection to the complainant/petitioner as per the directions issued by this Court. The affidavit filed by the first respondent at paragraphs 3 and 4 is as under: “3. As per Annexure A1 judgment this Hon'ble Court was pleased to issue the following directions; that the police should see that law and order is maintained and that the Temple and Sarpakavu is not demolished; that the police should also ensure that the petitioner's right to use the property other than the Temple and Sarpakavu is not obstructed; and that the police should also see that applicable Civil Court Orders are not violated. 4. It is respectfully submitted that I had taken all earnest steps to comply with Annexure A1 judgment. Further, I submit that I shall render Police protection as stipulated in Annexure A1 judgment as and when requested by the petitioner, stating the specified date and time during which police protection is required.” Cont. Case (C)No.923 of 2007 2 3. In view of the affidavit of undertaking filed by the first respondent, in our opinion, we need not have to pass any further orders in this contempt petition. 4. Placing on record the affidavit filed by the first respondent Sub Inspector of Police, this contempt petition is dropped for the present. 5. Consequently, all pending interlocutory applications stand rejected. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE vns/DK