IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 13TH JUNE 2011 / 23RD JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13923 of 2011(M) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SOBY GEORGE, S/O.KORA GEORGE, AGED 43 YEARS, FATHER ABEL'S COCHIN KALABHAVAN, ABEL MEMORIAL BUILDING, KALABHAVAN ROAD, COCHIN-18. BY ADV. SRI.JAMES ABRAHAM (VILAYAKATTU) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, INSPECTOR GENERAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM RANGE, ERNAKULAM. 682 018. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM. 682 018. 3. ABDUL KHADAR @ ANVAR, KHAIRUDHAR MANZIL, OLAVATTOOR.P.O., MALAPPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.13923/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15.5.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.13923 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th June, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution to respondents 1 and 2 to afford police protection for the petitioner against contumacious, culpable and violent acts apprehended from the third respondent. 2. According to the petitioner, he owes amounts to the third respondent. The petitioner is not able to discharge that liability. The petitioner has undertaken and promised to discharge the liability. But the third respondent is not accepting such promises. Instead, he is taking law into his own hands and is posing threat to the life and person of the petitioner. Protection may be granted to the petitioner against such illegal and violent acts on the part of the third respondent. This in short is the prayer. WPC No.13923 of 2011 2 3. The third respondent is served, but the third respondent has not chosen to enter appearance. 4. We turned to the learned Government Pleader for submissions. The learned Government Pleader submits that there are disputes between the petitioner and the third respondent, but in the perception of the police officials, there is no threat to the life or person of the petitioner. 5. When this petition came up for hearing on 6.6.2011, the following directions were issued by this Court, “The learned Government Pleader submits that if there be any threat against the petitioner from the third respondent for the reasons alleged in this petition, petitioner is at liberty to complain to the second respondent who shall thereupon take necessary action in accordance with law. In the light of that submission by the learned Government Pleader, we do not think it necessary to issue any specific direction.” 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if those observations are made absolute and permitted to remain, the petitioner shall be satisfied and no further directions need be issued. 7. The learned Government Pleader submits that the WPC No.13923 of 2011 3 police is willing to continue that undertaking and this writ petition can in these circumstances be disposed of confirming the said directions. 8. Having considered all circumstances, we are satisfied that the said course suggested by the petitioner and accepted by the learned Government Pleader can be followed. 9. In the result, a) This writ petition is allowed. b) In the light of the submissions of the learned Government Pleader extracted above, no further specific directions are issued. sd/- R.BASANT JUDGE sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/ true copy P.S.TO JUDGE