IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2008 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 14455 of 2008(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JACOB CHACKO, S/O.CHACKO, AGED 40 YEARS KANDATHIL PUTHEN VEEDU, MUTTAR, KUTTANAD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE SMT.P.V.PARVATHI SMT.REENA THOMAS SRI.L.RAM MOHAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ALAPPUZHA. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RAMANKARY POLICE STATION ALAPPUZHA. 3. KOSHY ABRAHAM @SURESH, PAKKIL VEEDU, MUTTAR, KUTTANADU TALUK 4. P.T.THOMAS @ BABU . PAKKIL VEEDU, MUTTAR KUTTANADU TALUK 5. THOMAS VARGHESE @ KUNJACHAN, VALAIL PUTHEN PARAMIL VEEDU,MUTTAR, KUTTANAD TALUK. 6. P.N.RAMANKUTTY, LOCAL COMMITTEE SECRETARY, CPI(M), MUTTAR. 7. K.E.MATHUKUTTY, KUDAKUTHIYIL VEEDU, MUTTAR WPC 14455/08 BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER FOR R6 SRI.R.GOPAN FOR R6 SRI.K.HARILAL – R7 GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 14455/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 - COPY OF PLAINT IN O.S.NO.840/2006 OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, ALAPPUZHA. EXT.P1(a) – COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 29.6.2007 IN O.S.NO.840/2006 OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, ALAPPUZHA. EXT.P1(b) – COPY OF DECREE DATED 29.6.2007 IN O.S.NO.840/2006 OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, ALAPPUZHA. EXT.P2 - COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 - COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 - COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.281/2008 FILED BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, ALAPPUZHA. EXT.P4(a) – COPY OF ORDER OF INJUNCTION PASSED ON 7.5.2008 BY THE CIVIL COURT. EXT.P4(b) – COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT FILED BEFORRE THE CIVIL COURT. EXT.P4(c) – COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CRIMINAL COURT. EXT.P4(d) – COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 24.5.2007 BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE. RESPONDENTS' EXTS. EXT.R7(a) – TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT AS O.S.NO.281/2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON THE FILE OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, ALAPPUZHA. EXT.R7(b) – TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN O.S.NO.281/2008 ON THE FILE OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, ALAPPUZHA DATED 16.5.2008. /TRUE COPY/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 14455 OF 2008-U ----------------------------------------- Dated 4th June, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair,J. The petitioner is the owner of 10 cents of land in Re-survey No.667/6-1 of Muttar Village, Kuttanad Taluk. He purchased it in 2003. He submits, the respondents 3 to 5 had an eye on the land. When they tried to trespass into his property, he moved the civil court and obtained Ext.P1 (a) judgment and Ext.P1(b) decree. The civil court injuncted the respondents 3 to 5 from trespassing into the plaint schedule property or commit waste or mischief therein. While so, the 6th respondent, who is the local leader of a political party, served Ext.P2 notice on the petitioner, alleging that he has reclaimed a water canal flowing through the above property. He was called upon to clear the canal or else under the leadership of the political party necessary action will be taken to clear the obstruction in the said canal, he was informed. The petitioner submits, thereafter on 2.5.2008, the respondents 3 to 7 and their supporters trespassed into his property, cut WPC 14455/08 2 down five mahagony trees and a coconut tree standing thereon. When the petitioner's father tried to stop them, he was abused using vulgar language and the 3rd respondent waved a knife at him and threatened to kill him. They also dug a hole in the property. Aggrieved by the above high-handed actions of the party respondents, the petitioner immediately lodged an information before the Ramankary Police Station. Since the police did not take any action, he filed Ext.P3 representation before the Superintendent of Police, Alappuzha. Now, the petitioner and his family members are being threatened by the party respondents, including the 6th respondent. But, the police are not taking any action. In the above background, this writ petition was filed, seeking the following reliefs: “A. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order, commanding the respondents 1 and 2 to render adequate and effective police protection to the life and peaceful residence of the petitioner and his family members against the respondents 3 to 7 and their associates. B. Direct 1st respondent to initiate appropriate action on Ext.P3 and book the culprits and proceed against them under the penal law.” 2. The 7th respondent has filed a counter affidavit, denying the allegations of the petitioner. According to the said respondent, there was a water canal running through the above said property. The petitioner has reclaimed it. It is also submitted that subsequently the petitioner filed WPC 14455/08 3 O.S.No.281/2008 before the Munsiff's Court, Alappuzha. Ext.P7(a) is the plaint in the said suit. The said respondent pointed out that the very same relief sought in the suit is being claimed by the petitioner from this Court. 3. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit, stating that after the filing of the Writ Petition, he has filed the suit under Order VIII Rule 1 of the C.P.C. After the receipt of the notice in the writ petition and the suit, the petitioner and his family members are prevented from moving around. They are being threatened incessantly. They apprehend that they may be attacked at any time. Pointing out all these facts, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P4(d) petition before the Superintendent of Police, Alappuzha on 26.5.2008. 4. Heard the learned counsel on both sides, including the learned Government Pleader for the official respondents. The learned counsel for the 6th respondent submitted that by Ext.P2, the said respondent meant that action in accordance with law alone will be taken against the petitioner for the reclamation of the canal, which was running through the petitioner's property. If the petitioner has reclaimed any canal or he has done anything which prevents free flow of rain water through his property, the party respondents can move the appropriate forums and redress their grievances. They cannot be permitted to take law into their hands and act as Prosecutor, WPC 14455/08 4 Witness and Judge and execute their decisions. 5. Regarding the civil dispute between the parties, they may seek reliefs from the competent forums. But, if there is any threat to the life of the petitioner or his family members, he may inform the 2nd respondent. In that event, the 2nd respondent shall take effective action to protect the life of the petitioner and his family members. The contentions of both sides regarding the civil dispute pending before the competent court are kept open. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. Nm/