IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 31271 of 2008(W) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. VIJAYA PANAKKAL, RETD.DEPUTY REGISTRAR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PUNNERJANI, MULANKUNNATHUKAVU, THRISSUR. 2. AYYAPPADAS.K.G, S/O.VIJAYA PANAKKAL, PUNERJANI, MULANKUNNATHUKAVU, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.N.P.SAMUEL. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT., HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE PRINCIPAL, MAHARAJAS COLLEGE, ERNAKULAM. 5. ARUNKUMAR, MALAYALAM FINAL YEAR STUDENT, MAHARAJAS COLLEGE,, ERNAKULAM. 6. SAJID, ARABIC 2ND YEAR STUDENT, MAHARAJAS COLLEGE, ERNAKULAM. 7. HARIS, ARABIC 2ND YEAR STUDENT, MAHARAJAS COLLEGE, ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R4 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENJAMIN PAUL, R5 TO R7 BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADV. SRI.KANNAN.S, ADV. SMT.S.RAKHEE, ADV. SRI.K.A.ANISH . THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.31271/2008-W: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM SUBMITTED BY PARENT-TEACHERS OF THE CLASS STUDENTS OF PHYSICS DEPARTMENT. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE OUT-PATIENT TICKET OF THE MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL, THRISSUR DTD. 14/10/2008. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY P.2. BEFORE R.4. ON 15/10/08. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY P.1. BEFORE R4 UNDER THE RIGHTS OF INFORMATION ACT ON 20/10/08. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY P.1. BEFORE R.2. ON 20/10/2008. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. prv. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.31271 OF 2008 W ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 10th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The first petitioner is the mother of the second petitioner. The 2nd petitioner is a student of the 4th respondent's College. They have approached this Court, seeking police protection, so that the second petitioner can come to the Maharajas College, Ernakulam and attend his classes. He is a 3rd year student of B.Sc.Physics. He is not associated with any students' organisation. So, he was not in the good books of the leaders of the students' unions. On 14.10.2008 at 12.30 p. m., immediately after the teacher went out of the 3rd year B.Sc.Physics class, a group of students entered the class room and brutally manhandled the students, including lady students. Two teachers who were present there, tried to intervene. But, the students who were led by respondents 5 to 7 did not heed the words of their teachers and brutally attacked the students, including the second petitioner. The students of the above said class submitted a complaint against the students involved in the incident, to the 4th respondent Principal of the College, through the Head of the Physics Department. But, he did not take necessary W.P.(C)No. 31271/08 -2- action on that complaint. Therefore, the first petitioner came to the College and personally requested the 4th respondent to take action against the students, who manhandled the second petitioner, by reporting to the police. The Parents-Teachers attached to the Physics Department submitted a representation before the Principal, a copy of which is produced as Exhibit P1. In that representation, the Principal was requested to take effective action against the culprits and also to take preventive steps against recurring of such incidents in future. The first petitioner took the second petitioner from the College and admitted him in the Medical College Hospital, Thrissur. Exhibit P2 is the out-patient ticket, evidencing admission of the second petitioner in the Medical College Hospital, Thrissur. Since, no action was taken on Exhibit P1, the second petitioner filed Exhibit P3 representation before the Principal, requesting him to take action against the culprits. Later, the first petitioner personally met the Principal and submitted Exhibit P4 representation under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, requesting him to furnish the details of the action taken by him in the matter. But, there was no immediate response from the Principal. He commented that he has got one month's time to give his reply. 2. Later, the first petitioner directly submitted a representation before the 2nd respondent, Commissioner of Police, detailing the W.P.(C)No. 31271/08 -3- incident, in which the second petitioner was beaten and also praying to take further action in the matter. A copy of that representation is Exhibit P5. The petitioners submit that the second petitioner is afraid of going to the College. He apprehends danger to his life. So, praying for protection to him, this Writ Petition is filed. 3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that on receiving intimation regarding the incident, a crime has been registered against the culprits for various offences, including the one under Section 308 of the IPC. Unless intimation regarding the violent incidents is given in time, the police may not be able to take any effective action. If the Principal informs about any violence, the police will take effective action, it is submitted. 4. The learned counsel appearing for respondents 5 to 7 submitted that all the allegations made against them are unfounded. They have no role, whatsoever, in the incident in which the second petitioner was injured. They further submit that they have no intention whatsoever to physically harm the second petitioner or attack him. 5. The activities of students involving commission of cognizable offences cannot be described as legitimate students' union activities. The Principal has got an important role to play in preventing violence in the Campus. He should enlist the support of the teachers and students W.P.(C)No. 31271/08 -4- against such violence. He should also inform the police promptly, if any violence erupts in the Campus. The police should also act promptly, if any information regarding commission of cognizable offence in the College Campus is received from anyone. They need not wait for any written request from the Principal. Writ of the Government must run in College Campuses also. Laws of the land operate without exception in all places, including College Campuses. So, if report regarding commission of any cognizable offence is received, the police cannot shirk their duty by waiting for a request from the Principal of the College. 6. If the second petitioner goes to the College and if there is any threat of physical violence against him, he may inform the 2nd respondent. In that event, the 2nd respondent shall arrange necessary protection, as the occasion demands and shall take stern action against the culprits involved. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn