IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL THURSDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2011 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 32107 of 2011(K) ------------------------ PETITIONER : --------------------- N.K. HAMEED, S/O. MOOSAKUTTY, AGED 48 YEARS, KALLERINTAVIDA, POST NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI SRI.V.A.SATHEESH SRI.J.ABHILASH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE HOME SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (SOUTH), TOWN POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE-673 001. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TOWN POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE-673001. 4. ABDUL HAMEED FAIZY, S/O. NOT KNOWN AGED 45 YEARS, GENERAL SECRETARY, ISLAMIC CENTRE, RAILWAY STATION LINK ROAD, KOZHIKODE - 673002. 5. MUSTHAFA MUNDUPARA, S/O. NOT KNOWN AGED 45 YEARS, ISLAMIC CENTRE, RAILWAY STATION LINK ROAD, KOZHIKODE - 673 002. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. CYRIAC KURIAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 32107 of 2011(K) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE SALE DEED (NO. 1488/2007) EXECUTED BY K. ISHAQ IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER DATED 14-05-2007. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE SALE DEED (NO. 2465/2008) EXECUTED BY P.K.RAMANATHAN AND OTHERS IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER DATED 22-09-2008. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 DATED 30-11-2011. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE ANOTHER COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 DATED 30-11-2011. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 TO THE PETITIONER DATED 30-11-2011. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE ANOTHER RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 TO THE PETITIONER DATED 30-11-2011. EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN ON SPOT DATED 30-11-2011. EXT.P8 : COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN A WEEK BACK OF THE PATHWAY RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.HARILAL,JJ ------------------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.32107 of 2011 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T Pius C. Kuriakose, J The petitioner, who is residing at Vadakara at a distance of about 50 Kms. from Calicut city has filed this writ petition seeking protection for his life as well as for putting up a gate on the compound wall of his property situated at Calicut. According to him for preserving his property it is absolutely necessary for him to put up a gate and keep the same under his lock and key. He alleges that respondents 4 and 5 who claims to be fuctioneries of an organisation by name Islamic Center and persons who owe allegiance to them are threatening him with danger to his life and limbs whenever he comes over to Calicut for inspecting his property. He is obstructed whenever he tries to put up a gate. He places reliance on Exts.P7 and P8 photographs. According to him the properties are situated very near to Calicut Railway Station and hence it is absolutely necessary that the properties are preserved under the lock and key of the petitioner. Hence he has filed this writ petition W.P(C) No.32107 of 2011 2 seeking protection not only for his life and limbs but also for construction of a proper gate on his compound wall. 2. Sri.Cyriac Kurian, the learned Government Pleader has taken notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and we have heard him also. 3. Sri.V.T.Madhavanunni, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that situation is so grave that there is every justification for granting the protection directions sought for. According to him respondents 4 and 5 have no right to obstruct the construction of a gate by the petitioner on the boundaries of of his property. The claims raised by them are absolutely frivolous. We referred to some of the title documents in support of his arguments. 4. May be Mr.Madhavanunni's submission that respondent Nos.4 and 5 cannot have any legal right to obstruct the construction of a gate by the petitioner upon his compound wall is correct. But what we understand from the pleadings and materials presently available is that respondents 4 and 5 are claiming some rights on the petitioner's property may be right of way. Since the above right is opposed by the petitioner, the nature of dispute between the petitioner and the party W.P(C) No.32107 of 2011 3 respondents in respect of the gate construction is civil, we are of the view that even if the petitioner's grievance is genuine as regards the gate construction he will have to approach the competent civil court. It may be possible for the petitioner to approach the civil court and obtain prohibitory orders against respondents 4 and 5. It always possible for the civil court to allow enforcement of such prohibitory orders by allowing putting up of gate under the police surveillance. But sitting in the present jurisdiction, we are not inclined to grant such directions. We shall now deal with the prayer for protection for life. The petitioner has submitted Exts.P3 and P4 petitions before the Station House Officer, Kozhikode Town Police Station. The petitions were filed only yesterday. Eventhough it is too early for the petitioner to complain that the police have not taken any action, we dispose of this writ petition issuing the following directions: The 3rd respondent before whom Exts.P3 and P4 are submitted will take up Exts.P3 and P4 immediately. He will conduct an enquiry into Exts.P3 and P4 without delay. As part of the enquiry he will summon the 4th and 5th respondents. If the enquiry it reveals that there is threat to the life and limbs of the W.P(C) No.32107 of 2011 4 petitioner from the part of respondents 4 and 5 or anybody acting under them, the 3rd respondent will take such steps for ensuring that the petitioner's life and limbs are safe. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K.HARILAL ab JUDGE ab