IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2011 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 30321 of 2010(M) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.T.CHANDUKUTY, AGED 78 YEARS, S/O. CHATHU, SHEEJA NIVAS, ELATHUR AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE TAUK, KOZHIKODE BY ADVS. SRI.BOBY MATHEW, SRI.E.T.MATHEW. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOZHIKODE CITY - 673 601. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONR OF POLICE, KOZHIKODE NORTH, KOZHIKODE - 673 601. 3. CIRCLE INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE - 673 601. 4. SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, ELATHUR, KOZHIKODE - 673 601. 5. KIRAN BABU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O. BAPPAYIL APPU, ELATHUR AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK - 673 601. 6. T.MANI, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, S/O. SREEDHARAN,THAZHETHAYIL HOUSE,MAKKADA VILLAGE, KAKKODI AMSOM AND MAKKADA DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK - 673 601. 7. PARAMBATH SURENDRAN, S/O.KUMARAN, PARAMBATH HOUSE, EKAROOR AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK - 673 601. Kss ..2/- ...2.... WPC.NO.30321/2010 M 8. MALIKANDI MANOJ, S/O.CHANTHAN, PANNIKOTTOR AMSOM, KUNDAYI DESOM,KOZHIKODE TALUK. 9. RAVEENDRAN, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O. CHANDU, VELUTHARAMBATH MEETHAL, KAKKODI AMSOM AND MAKKADA DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK - 673 601. 10. ABDUL HAKEEM, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O. ALAVI, PORUR, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 505. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. C.M. CHARISMA R5 TO R7 & R9 BY ADVS. SRI.M.KRISHNAKUMAR, SMT.PRABHA R.MENON. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.30321 of 2010-M ***************************** Dated this the 16th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. This petition for police protection filed as early as on 01.10.2010 remains without disposal even now. No interim orders were issued. Today when the case is called, there is no representation for the petitioner. Inference appears to be irresistible that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting this petition. A counsel appears for respondents 5, 6, 7 and 9. This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed for non prosecution. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/