IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 7TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 23618 of 2011(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ K.MANI @ MADHAVANKUTTY, AGED 54, S/O. KUTTAN, KIZHAKKEKALAM, EDATHARA P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADVS. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.THOMAS CHAZHUKKARAN SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SRI.P.K.RAKESH KUMAR SMT.M.A.RUXANA RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANKARA POLICE STATION, MANKARA, PALAKKAD-678 613. 3. RAMESH, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NORTH TOWN POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD-678 613. 4. SHYAM PRASAD, CONSTABLE, TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD-678 613. 5. JOHNSON LOBO, POLICE CIVIL OFFICER, TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD-678 613. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.K. VIPINDAS. R3 BY ADVS. SRI. B. RAMAN PILLAI. SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. SRI.SHYAM ARAVIND SRI.T.ANIL KUMAR SRI.MANU TOM R4 BY ADVS. SRI. T. RAMAPRASAD UNNI. SMT.ASHA BABU R5 BY ADVS. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN SRI.NIREESH MATHEW THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 23618 of 2011(B) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CARD DATED 13.5.2011. P2: COPY OF THE REPORT PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DATED 11.5.11. P3: COPY OF THE REFER REPORT OF DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD. P4: COPY OF THE PETITION IN CRL. MP.3307/11 FILED BEFORE JFMC-II, PALAKAD. P5: COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CARD DATED 24.6.11. P6: COPY OF THE FIS IN CRIME NO.148/11. P6(A): COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.148/11. P7: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN TO 2ND RESPONDENT. P7(A): COPY OF THE RECEIPT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE SCL. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C). No. 23618 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T Abdul Rehim, J. Allegations in this writ petition is with respect to harassment caused from the side of the 2nd respondent, at the instigation and aid of respondents 3 to 5. The petitioner is a daily labourer, assisting in burying of unidentified dead bodies in the Government Hospital at Palakkad. It is stated that the petitioner is a witness in a sensational murder case, popularly known as 'Sampath Murder Case', which is being investigated by the CBI, in which respondents 3 to 5 are implicated as accused. According to the petitioner, he had disclosed certain facts relating to the above said case to the CBI Officials, on 24-4-2011. It is alleged that on 7-5-2011 the petitioner was attacked on public road, and the police had failed to take any action inspite of a complaint lodged. On 10-5-2011 the petitioner WP(C). 23618/11 -2- was attacked again by certain persons, who according to him are the workers in a mill owned by the brother of the 3rd respondent. It is alleged that, inspite of hospitalisation of the petitioner and registration of Crime No.112/2011, the case was referred as 'false' without making any proper investigation. Against the final report, the petitioner had filed protest complaint before the JFCM - II, Palakkad and the same is now pending disposal. It is further stated that he was again attacked on 17-6-2011 by 3 other persons, for which another criminal case is registered as Crime No. 148 of 2011. It is the complaint of the petitioner that the 2nd respondent is not properly investigating into that case also. The petitioner further complains that the attack continued on 23-8-2011 also, and the petitioner had submitted Ext.P7 complaint. But no action was taken on the basis of such complaint. Under the above mentioned circumstances the petitioner is seeking directions to afford protection to his life from the constant attack and threat to his life. WP(C). 23618/11 -3- 2. In the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent it is stated that, the 3rd respondent was either in police custody or judicial custody, from 24-3-2011 to 19-7-2011, in connection with the murder case in which he is implicated as accused. After release also he is residing only in Ernakulam District, in terms of the conditions stipulated in the Bail Order. The allegation that the petitioner was attacked by the workers of the brother of the 3rd respondent on 10-5-2011, is stoutly denied. It is stated that the investigation of the crime registered with respect to the alleged incident happened only on 10-5-2011 and it was revealed that the petitioner was assaulted only by a person names Dasan because of some monetary disputes, that too on a date prior to 10-5-2011. All the allegations of assault or threat from the side of the 3rd respondent is stoutly refuted. It is contended that the petitioner had in fact suppressed various material facts while filing this writ petition. It is stated that the said respondent has absolutely WP(C). 23618/11 -4- no intention to cause any threat to the life of the petitioner or to assault him in any manner. 3. In the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent all the allegations raised in the writ petition are denied as untrue and false. It is contended that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in this writ petition based on the mere allegations raised, which are not supported by any material evidence. 4. Learned Government Pleader, on the basis of instructions received, submitted that the petitioner is a person in the habit of remaining intoxicated at most of the time. Investigations conducted by the second respondent on the basis of various complaints received from the petitioner revealed that the petitioner sustained injuries at an assault, which incident occurred near to a toddy shop from where he was consuming liquor, and that the respondents 3 to 5 have no connection in any manner with such attack. However, it is stated that the criminal case WP(C). 23618/11 -5- registered on the basis of the complaint of the petitioner was properly investigated and charge sheeted after arresting the accused named by the petitioner. It is further stated that as such there is no threat to the life of the petitioner, as alleged in this writ petition. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances and rival contentions raised at the Bar, we are of the considered opinion that the petitioner could not able to establish that there exist any threat to his life from the side of respondents 3 to 5, on the basis that he is a witness in the murder case in which they are implicated as accused. However, it is necessary in the interest of justice to ensure that no threat or intimidation to the life of the petitioner is caused in any manner on the basis that he is a witness in the murder case which invoked sensation to a larger extent. 6. Under the above mentioned circumstances we close this writ petition directing the 2nd respondent to keep vigil over the situation and to ensure that no threat or WP(C). 23618/11 -6- intimidation is caused to the life of the petitioner in any manner in connection with the murder case investigated by the CBI in which the petitioner is arrayed as a witness. 7. We make it clear that the above direction may not be interpreted in any manner to the effect that the respondents 3 to 5 are making any attempt to tamper with evidence or to influence the witness, in the case in which they are arrayed as accused. We also make it clear that the directions herein above shall not be taken as a ground to cancel the bail already granted to the said respondents in the said case. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) ksv/-