IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 9081 of 2010(I) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. A.ANITHA BHAI, LIJI NIVAS, THOZHUKKALKONAM, KATTAKODU P.O., KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. G.SILVESTER, KANTHALA KIZHAKKUMKARA VEEDU, KATTAIKODU P.O., OF DO. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NEDUMANGADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OFFICE OF CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KATTAKADA. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KATTAKADA POLICE STATION, KATTAKADA. 4. AJITH ANTONY, AGED 20, S/O.ANTONY, A.P.NIVAS, KUKKURUNNI, KATTAIKODU P.O., KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 5. SUNILRAJ KESARI, AGED 23, S/O.KESARI, SUNIL NILAYAM, NADUKANI, KATTAIKODU P.O., KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 6. VIJAYAKUMAR RAJAPPAN, AGED 45, V.S.BHAVAN, KUKKURUNNI, KATTAIKODU P.O., KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 7. KESARI MANAS, AGED 55, SUNIL NILAYAM, NADUKANI, KATTAIKODU P.O., KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. R4 TO R7 BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.9081 OF 2010: APPENDIX: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1.COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH OF PATHWAY INTERPOSING THE TWO OLD BUILDINGS. EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF INJUNCTION ORDER IN I.A.826 OF 2010 IN OS NO.117 OF 2010 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, NEDUMANGADU DATED 11.2.2010. EXT.P3. TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 10.3.2010 TO ERD RESPONDENT. K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.9081 of 2010-I ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 20th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioners have approached this Court seeking the following relief:-- “i. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing respondents 1 to 3 to afford adequate and effective police protection to the life and properties of petitioners from being subjected to commission of cognizable offences by respondents 4 to 7 and their henchmen.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioners is as follows: They are residing in old tiled buildings on either side of a pathway. Ext.P1 is the photograph. Respondents 4 to 7 wanted to convert the pathway to a motorable road by demolishing the outer walls of residential house. Petitioners filed suit before the Munsiff Court and obtained injunction against respondents 4 to 7 from demolishing the outer walls of residential houses and compound walls. Ext.P2 is the order of injunction. It is stated that the petitioners are threatened and intimidated with fear of death to coerce them to withdraw WPC 9081/2010 -2- the suit. In other words, their case is that there is utter disregard of Ext.P2 order. Petitioners filed Ext.P3 complaint before the Sub Inspector of Police. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for respondents 4 to 7. Learned counsel for respondents 4 to 7 would point out that the 7th respondent was not a party in the suit. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 7th respondent was included as a person interested in widening the pathway. The learned counsel for respondents 4 to 7 would submit that respondents 4 to 7 have no intention to widen the pathway by demolishing the building. We record the same and dispose of the writ petition. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS