IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2008 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 13737 of 2008(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: PETITIONERS ----------------------- 1. M.A.ANWAR, AGED 35 YEARS S/O.LATE ABOOBACKER'HOUSE NO.IV 328, MUNDETH HOUSE EDAVOOR PO.PERUMBAVOOR,PIN.683544 2. M.A.RAFEEK, AGED 40 YEARS S/O.LATE ABOOKACKER,HOUSE NO.IV/330-A, MUNDETH HOUSE EDAVOOR PO, PERUMBAVOOR,PIN-683544 3. SARA ABOOBACKER,AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.LATE ABOOBACKER,MUNDETH HOUSE,EDAVOOR PO, PERUMBAVOOR,PIN-683544. 4. HASSEENA ANWAR, AGED 31 YEARSA W/O.M.A.ANWAR,HOUSE NO.IV/329,MUNDETH HOUSE, EDAVOOR PO, PERUMBAVOOR,PIN-683544. 5. RAJEENA RAFEEK, AGED 37 YEARS, W/O. M.A.RAFEEK, HOUSE NO.IV 330-A, MUNDETH HOUSE, EDAVOOR PO PERUMBAVOOR, PIN-683544. 6. SHAHEEDA, W/O.LATE JABBI , CHIRAMURIYIL HOUSE, KUNJUNNIKKARA, ALWAYE, NOW RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.IV/330-A, MUNDETH HOUSE, EDAVOOR PO.PERUMBAVOOR,PIN-683544. BY ADV. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REP. BY SECRETARY (HOME), GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KODANADU POLICE STATION ERNAKULAM DISTRTICT 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 4. THE D.Y.S.P.,PERUMBAVOOR,ERNAKULAM DIST, 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL),ALUVA . 6. THE INSPECTOR GENERA; OF POLIC (CENTRAL ZONE) ERNAKULAM. 7. SHAFEEK,S/O.PAREEDPILLA,MOOLADAN HOUSE, EDAVOOR KARA,KOOVAPPALLY VILLAGE,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 8. SHIJU, S/O.MUHAMMED KUNJU,MOOLADAN HOUSE , EDAVOOR KARA ,KOOVAPPILLY VILLAGE,ERNAKULAM DIST. 9. KHAYES, S/O.MUHAMMED, CHERUVALLIKUDY HOUSE,EDAVOOR KARA,KOOVAPPALLY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM. 10. MUHAMMED SALIL, S/O.SALEEM,MUNDETH HOUSE , EDAVOOR KARA, KOOVAPPALLY VILLAGE ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN KOSHY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & K. HEMA, JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.13737 of 2008 I ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J: The petitioners 1 and 2 are brothers. Third Petitioner is their mother. Petitioners 4 and 5 are their wives. Sixth Petitioner is their sister. They are engaged in various businesses. Respondents 7 to 10 are rivals in business. Owing to business rivalry, they have attacked the first petitioner on 4.4.2008. Therefore, the first petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 representation before the Police pointing out the above incident and praying for protection. Based on that incident, a crime has been registered against the assailants, who are respondents 7 to 10. The First Information Report in that crime is Ext.P1. The first petitioner has also earlier moved the Sub Inspector by preferring Ext.P2 representation. Notwithstanding Exts.P2 and P3, the police have not taken any effective steps to protect the first petitioner or his family members who are the other WP(C).13737/08 2 petitioners. This Writ Petition is, therefore, filed seeking appropriate reliefs. 2. The 7th respondent has filed a counter affidavit on behalf of himself and respondents 8 to 10. According to him, first petitioner is a criminal. He is also very active in politics. He is a Member of the Okkal Grama Panchayat. He is the first accused in S.C.No.253 of 2007 pending trial before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-I), Ernakulam for various offences including the one under 307 IPC. The allegation against him is that he chopped off the left hand of the father of the 7th respondent. Respondent No.8 is one of the eye-witnesses to that incident. First petitioner tried to win over him and when he cannot be influenced the said respondent is being threatened and manhandled. It is also submitted that 2nd petitioner attempted to murder another prosecution witness in the above said prosecution case. Ext.R7(a) is the copy of F.I.R. registered against 2nd petitioner for various offences including the offence under 307 IPC. First petitioner is a habitual offender. He threatened to kill the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat and her family members and therefore she was constrained to file a petition before Minister for Local Self-Government, copy of which WP(C).13737/08 3 is produced as Ext.R7(b). It is also submitted that petitioners 1 and 2, who are habitual offenders, are not entitled to any protection. 3. Learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that there is family feud existing between petitioners and respondents 7 to 10 for the last several years. Both are indulging in criminal activities and crimes have been registered against both sides. Therefore, none of them are entitled to get police protection, it is submitted. Having regard to the facts of the case narrated above, we feel that this is not a fit case where this Court should invoke its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioners have to take recourse to other remedies available under law. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioners and their right to move other forums for appropriate reliefs. Sd/- K. Balakrishnan Nair (Judge) Sd/- K. Hema Krs. (Judge) WP(C).13737/08 4