IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2011 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 9281 of 2011(I) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.K.FRANCIS, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O.K.U.KURIAN, KALANKERIL HOUSE, KUTHEYATHODU, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR, SMT.V.SHYLAJA. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPUZHA, PIN – 688 001. 3. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHERTHALA, PIN – 688 524. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUTHIYATHODU, PIN – 688 533. 5. JOJI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O.FRANCIS, MEENATHEPARAMBIL HOUSE, KADAKARAPPALLY P.O., MADACKAL, ARTHUNGAL, CHERTHALA, PIN – 688 529. R1 TO R4 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. V.T.K. MOHANAN, R5 BY ADVS. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM, SRI.DIPU.R, SMT.MERCIAMMA MATHEW, SRI.K.S.HARIDAS, SRI.V.RENJITH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/03/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.9281/2011-I: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE R.4. DT. 04/02/2011. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 DT. 07/02/2011. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE R.1. DT. 11/03/2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.9281 of 2011 ***************************** Dated this the 30th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. Apprehending violent and culpable conduct directed against him from the 5th respondent, the petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of directions to respondents 1 to 4 to afford police protection to him. 2. It is unnecessary to advert to the detailed averments in the petition. According to the petitioner, the 5th respondent, under an erroneous impression that action against his kerosene outlet was taken by the authorities on the basis of a complaint (information furnished) by the petitioner, is threatening him and posing danger to the life and person of the petitioner. 3. Notice was ordered. The 5th respondent has entered appearance. The learned counsel for the 5th respondent undertakes that the 5th respondent has no intention to indulge in any contumacious or violent conduct against the petitioner. In fact, he has no connection whatsoever with the petitioner. The petitioner has filed this petition with oblique and mala fide motives. No direction under Article 226 are, in these W.P(C) No.9281 of 2011 2 circumstances, liable to be issued in favour of the petitioner, contends the learned counsel for the 5th respondent. 4. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions from respondents 2 to 4 submits that in the perception of the police officials also, there is no threat to the life or person of the petitioner. No directions under Article 226 are hence liable to be issued. If the petitioner perceives any danger, he can complain to the 4th respondent, who shall thereupon take necessary action. This petition may, in these circumstances, be dismissed, submits the learned Government Pleader. 5. We have considered all the relevant circumstances. It is the duty of the police to maintain law and order, to prevent commission of crimes and respond adequately to crimes, if any committed. No directions of this Court are ordinarily necessary to the police to compel them to discharge their duties. Exceptional circumstances may exist justifying the resort to the jurisdiction under Article 226 to issue such directions to the police. In the instant case, we find that no such circumstances are available. W.P(C) No.9281 of 2011 3 6. This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed. But we may state that in coming to this decision, we have taken note of the submission of the learned Government Pleader on behalf of the police that if there be any threat to the life or person of the petitioner, the police shall take necessary action. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/