IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29784 of 2011(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- NAVEEN, S/O. GOPINATHAN, AGED 26 YEARS, NAVEEN VILLA, CHEVAKKODE PARUVASSERY, KANNAMBRA AMSOM DESOM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY SMT.K.ANILA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD.678 683. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADAKKANCHERY POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 683. 3. THE SUB INSECTOR OF POLICE, VADAKKANCHERY POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 683. 4. C.K. GOPALAN, S/O. KUNJU, CHEVAKKODE HOUSE, PARUVASSERY.P.O, KANNAMBRA, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 678 001. 5. CHAMU, S/O. PAZHANI, CHEVAKKODU HOUSE, PARUVASSERY.P.O, KANNAMBRA, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 678 001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.29784/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 239/2009 OF SRO,VADAKKANCHERY EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 03/11/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P3:-COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EVIDENCING RECEIPT OF EXT.P2 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No. 29784 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 seeking police protection in respect of the property mentioned in the writ petition as well for his life. We are not at all inclined to grant the protection directions sought for in respect of the property as it is conceded at the Bar that in respect of the property, the 4th respondent has already instituted a suit before the Palakkad Sub Court. It was also conceded that in that suit, the 4th respondent has obtained an order of injunction restraining the petitioner from alienating the property. 2. The submission of Sri.Rajesh Sivaramankutty learned counsel for the petitioner was that under the cover of that injunction order, the petitioner is being forcefully prevented from even entering into his own property. Even if what the petitioner says is correct, then also it is for the petitioner to appraise the learned Subordinate Judge of the situation and seek appropriate WPC.No.29784/2011 2 modification of the interim order presently issued or fresh orders against the 4th respondent. 3. The learned counsel requested that directions be given to protect the life of the petitioner. We find that Ext.P2 petition has been submitted by the petitioner before the Circle Inspector of police, Vadakkancherry in Palakkad District. We direct the 2nd respondent to take up Ext.P2 immediately and to conduct a thorough enquiry into Ext.P2. If the enquiry reveals that any threat subsists to the life or limbs of the petitioner from respondents 4 and 5 or anybody acting under them, the 2nd and 3rd respondents shall do the needful for protecting the life and limb of the petitioner from all danger. The writ petition is disposed of as above. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K. HARILAL, JUDGE. dpk WPC.No.29784/2011 3