IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2011 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 7754 of 2011(T) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- NOWFAL P.V., S/O.P.K.ABOOBACKER, PARATT VEEDU, ORUMANAYOOR P.O., CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI. E.D.GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. MUHAMMED HABEEB, S/O.MUHAMMED KUTTY, CHEENAN FAMILY, ORUMANAYOOR DESOM, CHAVAKKAD - 680512. 2. YAHIYA P.M., S/O.MOIDUNNI HAJI, PUTHIYAVEETTIL MANJIL HOUSE, ORUMANAYOOR P.O., CHAVAKKAD - 680512. 3. SADATH P.M., PUTHIYAVEETTIL MANJIL HOUSE, ORUMANAYOOR P.O., ORUMANAYOOR, PIN - 680512. 4. SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, CHAVAKKAD, PIN – 680 512. 5. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR, PIN – 680 001. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SABU R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT R4 & R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.K. VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 7754 of 2011(T) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE C.I., THRIPUNITHURA POLICE STATION. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE FIR NO. 54 DATED 4-1-2011 REGISTERED BY THE THRIPUNITHURA POLICE STATION. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR DATED 20-1-2011. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE FIR NO. 137 DATED 19-2-2011 REGISTERED BY CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 21/2/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.7754 of 2011-T ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of April, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioner has come to this Court complaining of threat to his life and person by respondents 1 to 3. The petitioner is employed abroad. The 1st respondent was an employee of the petitioner. There are some disputes between the petitioner and the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent along with respondents 2 and 3 are now posing threat against the life and person of the petitioner. The petitioner, in these circumstances, prays that police protection may be afforded to him. 2. Respondents 1 to 3 have entered appearance. The 1st respondent has entered appearance through one counsel and respondents 2 and 3 through another. Both counsel submit that the allegation of threat posed against the petitioner by the respondents is totally unjustified. The undertaking of respondents 1 to 3 may be recorded that they shall not pose any threat to the life or person of the petitioner. No directions under Art.226 of the Constitution are necessary, submits the learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3. W.P.(C) No.7754 of 2011 -: 2 :- 3. The learned Government Pleader, after taking instructions from respondents 4 and 5, submits that in the perception of respondents 4 and 5 there is no threat whatsoever to the life or person of the petitioner. It is true that the petitioner has lodged a complaint against the 3rd respondent. A crime has been registered under Secs.341 and 323 IPC. Necessary action is being taken by the police officials. If there be any threat against the life or person of the petitioner from respondents 1 to 3, necessary action shall promptly and effectively be taken by respondents 4 and 5. This undertaking may be accepted. No specific directions under Art.226 of the Constitution are necessary, submits learned Government Pleader. 4. Maintenance of law and order is the duty of the police and normally even without any direction of this Court police is expected to maintain law and order which includes the duty to prevent the commission of any crime. In the facts and circumstances of this case, we are inclined to accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader, on behalf of respondents 4 and 5, that no threat to the life or person of the petitioner is perceived by the police officials. We are also inclined to accept the undertaking of the learned Government W.P.(C) No.7754 of 2011 -: 3 :- Pleader, on behalf of respondents 4 and 5, that threat, if any, emanating from respondents 1 to 3 against the petitioner shall be effectively dealt with and deterred. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that no further directions are necessary. 5. This writ petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed. We may record that in coming to this decision we have heavily relied on the submission of the learned Government Pleader that needful shall be done if there be any threat against the life or person of the petitioner from respondents 1 to 3 as also the submission on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 that they shall not pose any threat to the life or person of the petitioner. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/ K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge