IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2011 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 8567 of 2011(U) ------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. PRASANNAKUMARI AMMA, D/O.LAKSHMIKUTTY AMMA, AGE 65, ALKIYAKONATHU VEEDU, PULINKODU, KUZHAKADU MURI, VEERANAKAVU VILLAGE. 2. MANJU, D/O.PRASANNAKUMARI AMMA, AGE 35, OF DO. DO. BY ADVS. SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR, SRI.P.M.SANEER, SRI.V.S.THOSHIN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KATTAKKADA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (RURAL)-695 101. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, (RURAL) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 101. 3. AJITHKUMAR, SISIRAM, KAURAKONAM, VEERANKAVU VILLAGE-695 001. 4. VIJAYAPRADAN, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, GEETHA BHAVAN, NEAR PULINKODU DEVI TEMPLE KURAKONAM, VEERANAKAVU VILLAGE-695 001. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. C.M. CHARISHMA, R3 & R4 BY ADVS. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN, SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/04/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.8567/2011-U: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT. 08/03/2011 SUBMITTED TO THE R.1. BY THE P.2. EXT.P.2. & P.2.A: COPY OF THE PETITION DT. 10/03/11 SUBMITTED BY THE P.2. AND THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE VANITHA POLICE CELL. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE P.1. TO THE R.1. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE O.P. TICKET DT. 12/03/11 REGARDING THE ASSAULT ON THE P.2. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE PETITION FOR POLICE PROTECTION AND FOR POLICE ACTION AGAINST THE 3RD AND THE 4TH RESPONDENTS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DT. 14/03/11. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. 243/11 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBIT: EXT.R3.A: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. NO. 233/2011 OF MUNSIFF COURT, NEDUMANGAD. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 8567 of 2011-U ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of April, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioners mother and daughter, have come to this Court seeking issue of directions under Art.226 of the Constitution to respondents 1 and 2 to afford police protection to them against illegal, wanton and culpable conduct of respondents 3 and 4. 2. According to the petitioners, they own 50 cents of land. That property was allegedly allotted to them in a partition entered into in the family. The wife of the 3rd respondent one Jayasree is related to the petitioners. She has property on the northern side of the property of the petitioners. According to the petitioners, there is a pathway through the property on the north to reach the main road. That property is being illegally blocked by the said Jayasree. The 3rd respondent is the husband of the said Jayasree and the 4th respondent is a friend of the 3rd respondent. The petitioners complain that respondents 3 and 4 W.P.(C) No. 8567 of 2011 -: 2 :- are indulging in contumacious, violent and culpable conduct against the petitioners consequent to the dispute regarding the pathway between the petitioners and the said Jayasree. 3. Respondents 3 and 4 have entered appearance. The learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4 submits that the petitioners are not entitled for any order of police protection. There is a serious bona fide dispute about the existence of the pathway. Both sides have already approached the civil court. Interim orders have been passed by the civil court. Parties must now abide by the orders of the civil court and complain to the civil court if there are any violations of the interim orders. At any rate, there is no justification now in seeking police protection. The petitioners are attempting to steal a march over Jayasree and respondents 3 and 4 in the civil disputes which have already been filed before the civil court. No directions under Art.226 of the Constitution are liable to be issued, submits the learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4. 4. The learned Government Pleader, on behalf of respondents 1 and 2, submits that it is true that there is a civil dispute between the parties. Complaints were received by the police from the parties. Police had advised the parties to go to the civil court and get their disputes resolved. Accordingly, W.P.(C) No. 8567 of 2011 -: 3 :- both have now gone to the civil court. Suits have been filed. Interim orders have been obtained. The police do not want to intervene in the civil dispute between the parties. Parties may be directed to seek appropriate relief from the civil court. In the perception of the police, there is no threat to the life or person of the petitioners. If there be any such threat, the petitioners can complain and appropriate action in accordance with law shall be taken. There is no necessity to issue any specific direction under Art.226 of the Constitution now, submits the learned Government Pleader. 5. Maintenance of law and order and the prevention of crimes is the duty of the police. No specific directions are necessary under Art.226 of the Constitution by this Court to the police to maintain law and order. Where exceptional circumstances are shown to exist, powers under Art.226 of the Constitution are invoked to issue such directions. In the instant case, we find absolutely no need to issue any such direction. We accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader that the police shall not intervene in the civil dispute between the parties. We accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader that if there is any commission of crime or threat to the law and order situation, police shall take necessary action in the W.P.(C) No. 8567 of 2011 -: 4 :- matter. 6. Accepting the said submission of the learned Government Pleader, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge