IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 26170 of 2008(M) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: -------------------- 1. LAILA BEEVI, W/O.ALAHUDEEN, J.A.MANZIL, NILAMEL, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM. 2. ALAHUDEEN, J.A.MANZIL, NILAMEL, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA. 5. MURALEEDHARAN PILLAI, S/O.RAMAN PILLAI, THENNOOR VEEDU, THRIKKANNAMANGAL, KOTTARAKKARA P.O., 691 506. 6. SUNIL KUMAR, CHIRAYIL VEEDU, PARAYATTU, THRIKKANNAMANGAL, KOTTARAKKARA P.O. PIN 691 506. 7. N.RAVEENDRAN PILLAI, RAVEENDRABHAVAN, THRIKKANNAMANGAL, KOTTARAKKARA P.O. 691 506. 8. VISWANATHAN PILLAI, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN PILLAI, KOUSTHOOBHAM, THRIKKANNAMANGAL, KOTTARAKKARA P.O., 691 506. WP(C).No. 26170 of 2008(M) 9. SURESH, VEGITABLE MERCHANT, THRIKKANNAMANGAL, KOTTARAKKARA P.O. 691 506. 10. ROY, VALIYAVILA VEEDU, THRIKKANNAMANGAL, KOTTARAKKARA P.O. 691 506. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL FOR R1 TO R4 ADV. SRI.S.MUHAMMED HANEEFF FOR R5 TO R10 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 26170 of 2008(M) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT AS C.M.P. NO.3436/2008 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KOTTARAKKARA. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 21/07/08 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R5(a): COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14/08/2008 FILED BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR BY THE LOCAL PUBLIC. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Rs/ K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(C)NO. 26170 OF 2008 ============================ DATED THIS THE 15th OCTOBER 2008 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair,J. The petitioners are wife and husband respectively. The first petitioner along with Mr.Issac purchased a building in Kottarakkara. Some of the rooms are used by the petitioners herein for running their business. Respondents 5 to 10 are persons, who claim that the transfer of the above said building to the first petitioner and Mr.Issac was made by the transferor to cheat them. The previous owner was running a money lending business and deposits were also received from the public. But the petitioners have no connection whatsoever with the erstwhile owner. They have purchased the property in good faith and for proper consideration. But respondents 4 to 10 are coming and threatening the petitioners. So they filed Ext.P2 petition before the Superintendent of Police, Kollam on 21-7-2008 seeking necessary protection to their life. Thereafter again the party WPC. 26170/2008 -2- respondents trespassed in to the business premises of the petitioners on 4-8-2008 and threatened them. Though police was informed, no action was taken. Therefore, the second petitioner preferred Ext.P1 complaint before the Magistrate which was forwarded to the police by the learned Magistrate under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and a crime has been registered. The petitioners pray that the threat from the part of respondents 5 to 10 are continuing and therefore, they required police protection. But the police did not take any effective action. Hence, this writ petition. 2. The party respondents have a different story to tell. They say one Mr.Satheesan, who was the owner of the building has received crores of rupees as deposit from the local people. They deposited the money to save the same for the marriages of their daughters etc. The building worth more than one crore has been transferred in favour of the first petitioner and Mr.Issac for a sum of Rs.seven lakhs and now the present owners are planning to sell the same to a non-resident Indian for Rs.90 lakhs. The second petitioner and Mr.Issac are persons dealing in WPC. 26170/2008 -3- such disputed properties. They purchase disputed properties and sell it and thereby make a huge profit. In this case, the depositors are staging a peaceful Dharna before the building. For that they are being threatened and attacked by the criminal gang of Mr. Issac who is one of the present owners. Pointing out these aspects and also praying for protection to their lives, the depositors have filed a mass representation dated 14-8-2008 before the District Collector, a copy of which is produced as Ext.R5(a). The petitioners have filed a reply affidavit denying the allegations against him. 3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that no petition has been filed by the petitioners before the local police station concerning any threat to their life. A crime has been registered based on Ext.P1 complaint forwarded by the learned Magistrate. 4. The facts pleaded by the petitioners are seriously disputed by the official respondents as well as the party respondents. So this Court cannot take any decision on disputed questions of fact in these proceedings. If the WPC. 26170/2008 -4- allegations of the party respondents are correct, the petitioners are not entitled to get any reliefs. We are not expressing any final opinion on the above aspect. Having regard to the nature of the facts pleaded, we feel that this Court should not invoke its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in favour of the petitioners. The petitioners have to invoke the ordinary remedies available to them under the Codes of Criminal procedure and the Civil Procedure. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioners and their right to move other forums for appropriate reliefs. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE M.C. HARI RANI JUDGE ks.