IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2011 / 20TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18000 of 2011(Y) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. ABDUL AZEEZ, 53 YEARS, S/O. BADARUDEEN, THODIYIL VEEDU, VALATHUNGAL.P.O, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK. 2. AMEENA AZEEZ, 21 YEARS, D/O. ADBUL AZEEZ, THODIYIL VEEDU, VALATHUNGAL.P.O,KOLLAM TALUK. BY ADVS. SMT.MINI GANGADHARAN, SRI.N.C.SAJUNAM. RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 001. 2. THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER,KOLLAM - 691 001. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERAVIPURAM - 691 011. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,ERAVIPURAM - 691 011. 5. FAIS, 30 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL SALAM, THODIYIL VEEDU, VALATHUNGAL.P.O, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK - 691 011. 6. ANAS, 40 YEARS, THODIYIL VEEDU, VALATHUNGAL.P.O, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK - 691 011. 7. SAJEEV, 43 YEARS, S/O. BADARUDEEN, THODIYIL VEEDU, VALATHUNGAL.P.O, KOLLAM - 691 011. R1 TO R4 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.K.BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.18000/2011 Y APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: THE DISCHARGE CARD DTD. 28/06/2011 FOR THE 1ST PETITIONER. P2: THE DISCHARGE CARD DTD. 28/06/2011 FOR THE 2ND PETITIONER. P3: COPY OF PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER'S WIFE BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT DTD. 23/06/2011. P4: PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5: POSTAL RECEIPTS (3) FOR HAVING SEND THE PETITION TO RESPONDENTS 3 & 4. P6: COPY OF FIR IN ERAVIPURAM P.S. CR.1535/2010. P7: COPY OF FIS IN ERAVIPURAM P.S. CR.1535/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JJ. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 18000 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose,J. In this writ petition under Article 226 the petitioners, a father and daughter seek protection for their lives and persons and also for properties belonging to them. They have complained that even though Exts.P3 and P4 petitions were submitted by them complaining of highhanded actions from the party respondents, respondents, 2 ,3 and 4 have not so far taken any action. Today we have heard the submissions of Smt.Mini Gangadharan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.V.K.Babu, senior Government Pleader. Learned Government Pleader on the basis of the instruction received pursuant to this court's order dated 6.7.2011 submitted that the petitioners and the party respondents are close relatives and members of the same family. It is submitted that long pending disputes exists between them over their family properties. It is further submitted that Exts.P6 and P7 were actually registered on the basis of the information given by one of the petitioners and that WP(C).18000/2011 2 the 6th respondent is the accused therein. Learned Government Pleader also submitted that there is another crime registered by the police at the instance of Sri.Abdul Salam, the father of the 5th respondent, in which the 1st petitioner is the accused (Crime No.720/2011). According to the learned Government Pleader, at the moment there is no warrant for rendering protection either for the lives or for the properties of the petitioners. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners per contra would submit that the petitioners are finding it extremely difficult to have a peaceful living due to threat from the party respondents. He submitted that the 2nd petitioner who is a student pursuing studies is not in a position to participate in the examination which is scheduled to be take place next week due to threat from the party respondents. 3. Having considered the submissions addressed at the bar and other materials placed on record we feel that the petitioners and the party respondents should seek redressal from the competent civil court regarding their properties. We relegate them to the remedy before the competent civil court to have redressal of grievance if any concerning the properties. For the WP(C).18000/2011 3 protection sought for the lives and persons of the petitioners, we do not find any reason not to accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader that the moment there is no threat on the lives of the petitioners. We notice that crimes have been registered by the police on the basis of the complaint received from both sides and the crimes are under investigation. We direct the investigating officer of both these crimes to expedite matters and file final reports in both the crimes at the earliest, at any rate within two months of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the 4th respondent Sub Inspector of Police receives any petition from the 2nd petitioner seeking police protection in the matter of going to Government ITC, Mayyanadu for the purpose of writing examination after 15th July, 2011, the 3rd respondent will ensure that the 2nd petitioner is able to participate in the examination without any obstruction or threat from the part of any of the party respondents. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C).18000/2011 4