IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2008 / 3RD MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1218 of 2008(T) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ DR.AJITH PRASAD K.C., S/O.CHALLAPPAN PILLAI, AGED 46 YEARS, LECTURER, M.G.COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, RESIDING AT KARAMEL HOUSE, AVANEESWARAM R.S.P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT PIN 691517 BY ADV. SRI.T.S.RAJAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SP OF POLICE, KOLLAM, SP OFFICE, KOLLAM 673307. 2. R.BALAKRISHNAN PILLAI, S/O.RAMAN PILLAI, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, KEEZHOOT HOUSE, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DT. 691506 3. MANOJ, S/O.CHANDARASEGHARA PILLAI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, PUTHIYAVEEDU HOUSE, VADAKODE, KURA P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM 691 506 4. JAYAPRAKASH.T., S/O.THANKAPPAN PILLAI, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, SUDHA BHAVANAM, MANJAKKALA P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM 691 506. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BENJAMIN PAUL ADVS. SRI.S.RAJEEV -- R3 & R4 SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN SRI.N.JAMES KOSHY --- R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/01/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO: 1218/2008 T APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1. COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE GENERAL BODY OF 172 NSS KARAYOGAM DT. 12/12/2007. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 24/12/2007 PUBLISHED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE 172 NSS KARAYOGAM. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT. 24/12/2007 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R1. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT. 5/1/2008 BEFORE THE ASP, PUNALOOR DT. 5/1/2008. EXT.P5. COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 9/2008 DT. 6/1/2008 OF THE KUNNIKODE POLICE STATION. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL. True copy tga K.Balakrishnan Nair & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ======================== W.P(C).No.1218 of 2008 ======================== Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair,J. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the first respondent to give adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioner. The brief facts of the case as pleaded by the petitioner are as follows: 2. The petitioner is a member of the Manjakkala Bhaskara Vilasam NSS Karayogam. Earlier he was the president of that Karayogam. There is a Devaswom called Thalavoor Devaswom managing 16 Temples. The Committee of the Devaswom consists of representatives of the Nair Karayogams in the area. A meeting to elect the representative of the Manjakkala Karayogam to the said Devaswom was scheduled to be held on 20.12.2007. Ext.P1 is the notice issued for the same. The second respondent is the President of the Pathanapuram Taluk Union of the NSS. He presided over the meeting of the Karayogam, which met to elect the representative of the Karayogam. The second respondent insisted that the election should be held by open vote whereas the petitioner and most of the members insisted that it should be by secret ballot. Finally, the said dispute could not be resolved WP(C) 1218/08 -: 2 :- and no election took place. The petitioner submits that since he insisted for secret ballot, the second respondent has developed ill will towards him. The second respondent is a very influencial person. Respondents 3 and 4 are his relatives and supporters. The petitioner submits that the second respondent has arranged muscle men to attack him and other members of the Karayogam, who wanted secret ballot for election. One Madhusudhanan Pillai, who is a member of the Karayogam was attacked by the men of the second respondent on 23.12.2007. So, the petitioner along with others filed Ext.P3 representation before the police pointing out the above facts and sought protection to their lives and properties. It was followed by Ext.P4 representation. Since the police did not take any effective action, this writ petition is filed seeking appropriate reliefs. 3. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that based on the incident involving attack on Madhusudhanan Pillai, a crime has been registered. The learned Government Pleader further submitted that the allegations made against the second respondent are unfounded. 4. The second respondent has filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations against him. He submitted that he is a respectable political leader and only to mar his reputation the allegations are made. Respondents 3 and 4 also filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations against them. 5. Having regard to the allegations and counter allegations, we feel that no positive direction to give police protection to a WP(C) 1218/08 -: 3 :- particular person should be issued in this writ petition. But the police shall look into the matter and appropriate action shall be taken if any report of cognisable offence is received. If there is any genuine apprehension to the petitioner regarding his safety, he may inform the police and in that event, the police shall look into the same. Writ petition is disposed of as above. K.Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 23/1