IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2011 / 7TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 19539 of 2011(N) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SHAYLENDRAN, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, KRISHNA BHAVAN, VELLOOPPARA, VELLANAD MURI, VELLANAD VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (LAW & ORDER), POLICE HEADQUARTERS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARYANAD POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 542. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARYANAD POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 542. 5. K.VIJAYAKUMARAN NAIR, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNA PILLAI, "SREE SHYLAM", MELAMCODE, VALIYARA, VELLANAD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 543. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA R5 BY ADV. SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.19539/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO.471/2011. P2:- COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT IN CRIME NO.471/2011 P3:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT DTD. 24.5.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.19539 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. Allegation of the petitioner is that, he was kidnapped by three persons identifiable by sight, on 16.5.2011 during night, and he was deliberately man-handled by those persons. It is alleged that the miscreants came to the house of the petitioner in police dress and introduced themselves as Sub Inspector of Police and Police Constables. After escaping from the clutches of those persons, the petitioner submitted a complaint before the police, on the basis of which Ext.P1 crime was registered and investigation of the said case is in progress. 2. Grievance voiced by the petitioner is that, the respondents 3 and 4 are acting hand in glove with the accused impleaded in Ext.P1 crime, and is keeping a silent attitude against the constant threat and intimidation being 2 W.P.(C) No.19539 of 2011 caused to the life and person of the petitioner, at the instance of the 5th respondent. It is alleged that, inspite of various complaints submitted to respondents 3 and 4, no effective steps were taken to protect the life of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner is approaching this Court. 3. In the counter affidavit filed by the 5th respondent all the allegations were refuted. It is stated that the petitioner is accused in Crime No.1202 of 2010 of Aryanad Police Station, registered for offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC and the 5th respondent happened to be the witness in the said case. Since the 5th respondent had given evidence against the petitioner, the petitioner is keeping enemical terms with him. Further allegation of the 5th respondent is that, he got bail in Ext.P1 case by appearing before the Magistrate Court, pursuant to direction issued by this Court while dismissing an anticipatory bail petition. Now the petitioner is raising all sort of tricks to create a situation that the police authorities 3 W.P.(C) No.19539 of 2011 can move for cancellation of the bail granted to the 5th respondent. 4. Learned Government Pleader, on the basis of instructions received from the 4th respondent submitted that, there is no threat to the life of the petitioner as alleged. It is further submitted that Ext.P1 case is under investigation and that the 5th respondent was already released on bail in that case. It is also stated that the police have not taken any steps for cancellation of the bail granted to the 5th respondent. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent made a specific submission that, he has no intention to cause any threat to the life of the petitioner and that he is not indulging any such activity as alleged. Under the above mentioned circumstances, we do not find any specific reason warranting issuance of any direction from this Court to afford police protection. However, if respondents 3 and 4 receives any reliable information regarding any such threat, 4 W.P.(C) No.19539 of 2011 necessary action under law shall be taken without any laches. The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations and directions. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE ami/