IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2010 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 15402 of 2010(A) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- MOHAMMED RAFI, AGED 58 YEARS S/O.HAJI P.S.KASIM BAWA RAWTHER PARAKKAVETTI PUTHEN PARAMBIL, PERUVANNA EAST CHANGANACHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHANGANACHERRY. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHANGANACHERRY 4. ADV.ANIL, S/O.THANKAPPAN C/O.ADV.RAVEENDRANATH, NEAR KAIL BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE PAZHAVATHU, CHANGANACHERRY. 5. SRI.CHANDRAN, CPI (M) OFFICE NEAR K.S.R.T. BUS STAND ,CHANGANACHERRY. 6. SRI.RATHEESH, NEW STYLE HAIR SYSTLE, M.Y.M.A.ROAD CHANGANACHERRY. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.M.NAZAR. R4 TO R6 BY ADV. SRI.RAJ MOHAN R.PILLAI SMT.D.MINI RAJAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 15402 OF 2010: APPENDIX: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 14.5.2010 TO THE PETITIONER GIVEN TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15.5.2010 OF THE PETITIONER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P3.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 16.5.2010 TO THE PETITIONER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4.TRUE COPY OF A NEWS ITEM APPEARED IN THE MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DATED 16.5.2010. EXT.P5.TRUE COPY OF A NEWS ITEM APPEARED IN THE MANGALAM DAILY DATED 16.5.2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R4A.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE ACCOMMODATION CONTROLLER AT CHANGANACHERRY. K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.15402 of 2010-A ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 27th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. This writ petition is filed seeking police protection. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:-- Petitioner is a business man. He is having a lodge and three shop rooms. The case of the petitioner is that one of his tenants left abroad and that since the rent was not paid he withdrew the electricity. The 6th respondent claims to be a sub-lessee. It is stated that respondents 4 and 5 who are political goondas along with a group of people ransacked the lodge owned by the petitioner slapped him and stolen away the electrical fuse and threatened the life of the petitioner. A counter affidavit has been filed by respondents 4 to 6. 2. Learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 to 6 would point out that actually the intention of the petitioner is to forcefully evict the 6th respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no such intention and that the 6th respondent will be evicted only WPC 15402/2010 -2- in accordance with law. We record the submission of both the parties. In view of the apprehension of the petitioner we dispose of the writ petition directing respondents 1 to 3 to render protection for the life of the petitioner, his wife and children and also his employees as against any threat from respondents 4 to 6. However, we make it clear that, under the cover of this order the petitioner is not permitted to evict the 6th respondent by force. If the petitioner wants to evict the 6th respondent, necessarily he must resort to lawful methods. We also direct that respondents 1 to 3 shall not in any manner assist the petitioner in forcefully evicting the 6th respondent. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS