IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2010 / 20TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36531 of 2009(J) -------------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- VARGHESE, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O.GEORGE, KAITHAMANGALATH HOUSE, KOOTTALA DESOM, OLLUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OLLUR. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNUTHY POLICE STATION, MANNUTHY. 4. THOMAS, S/O.GEORGE, KAITHAMANGALATH HOUSE, KOOTTALA DESOM, OLLUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, OLLUKKARA P.O. 5. JOSEPH, S/O.JOHN, KAITHAMANGALATH HOUSE, KOOTTALA DESOM, OLLUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRIC, OLLUKKARA P.O. 6. GEORGE, S/O.JOHN, KAITHAMANGALATH HOUSE, KOOTTALA DESOM, OLLUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRIC, OLLUKKARA P.O. 7. DANIEL, S/O.JOHN, KAITHAMANGALATH HOUSE, KOOTTALA DESOM, OLLUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.OLLUKKARA P.O. W.P.(C).NO.36531 OF 2009 J 8. SIBIN, S/O.THOMAS, KAITHAMANGALATH HOUSE, KOOTTALA DESOM, OLLUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. OLLUKKARA P,.O. 9. DEYSON, S/O.JOSEPH, KAITHAMANGALATH HOUSE, KOOTTALA DESOM, OLLUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. OLLUKKARA P.O. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI T.K. VIPINDAS. ADV. SRI.JIJO PAUL FOR R4,5,7,8&9 SRI.N.P.SAMUEL FOR R6 SRI.B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN FOR R6 SRI.A.R.GEORGE(MEDIATOR) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).NO.36531 OF 2009 J PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL REPORT ISSUED FROM DISTRICT HOSPITAL DATED 16.11.2009. EXT.P2TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R. NO.667/2009 DATED 16.11.2009. EXT.P3TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 11.12.2009. EXT.P4TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 12.12.2009. EXT.P5TRUE COPY OF THE R3ECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT T4O THE PETITIONER DATED 12.12.2009. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R6(A) ROUGH SKETCH OF THE LIE OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.R6(B) PHOTO COPY OF COMMON ORDER IN I.A.NO.11515/09 & I.A.NO.10825/09 IN O.S.1317/09 OF THE II ADDL. MUNSIFF COURT, THRISSUR DTD.22.12.09. // True Copy // PS to Judge K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P(C). NO. 36531 OF 2009 J --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th August, 2010 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate and meaningful police protection to the petitioner and his family in order to protect his life and property from respondents 4 to 9 and his men. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate legal actions against respondents 4 to 9.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner along with her wife is working in Gujarat. They are in possession of 1 acre 60 cents of property. It is stated that WPC.36531/2009 J 2 a Suit has been filed as OS.No.1317 of 2009 before the Additional Munsiff Court, Thrissur seeking injunction against respondents 4 to 9. It is stated that they encroached into the property while the petitioner was in Gujarat. An interim injunction has been granted. It is stated that on 14.11.2009, respondents 4 to 9 along with their henchmen trespassed into the property of the petitioner and caused severe damages to the yields in the property. Petitioner came to Kerala and lodged a complaint against the culprits. On 15.11.2009, respondents 4 to 9 again trespassed into the petitioner's property and forcibly removed the damages caused in the property. Petitioner has already filed an Application for violation of the injunction order. There is reference to threat on 15.11.2009. It is stated that the petitioner's wife and daughter who is pregnant are not permitted to come out of their house. There is a Counter Affidavit filed by the third respondent also. 3. A Counter Affidavit is filed by the sixth respondent. Learned counsel for the 6th respondent points out WPC.36531/2009 J 3 that the matter is pending in a civil suit and it has to be decided by the competent civil court. He would submit that the sixth respondent has no intention to cause any threat to the life of the petitioner or his wife or daughter. We record the said submission. We further take note of the following statement in paragraph 4 of the Counter Affidavit of the third respondent: “4. I have also made an enquiry about the matter filed in W.P.(C).No.36531/09 and found that no threat or other danger is prevailing against the life and property of the petitioner and his family members. There is no law and order issue at present. Police is ready to give all adequate protection to the petitioner as and when required. In addition to this, I have called the respondents mentioned in the above petition and warned them not to create any issue at the disputed area and also to the petitioner. If anything related in the above property dispute, both were advised to approach before the courts, and follow the court directions.” 4. Learned Government Pleader also submits that protection for the life of the petitioner will be granted as and WPC.36531/2009 J 4 when required. As far as the issues relating to the property are concerned, that is a matter to be decided by the competent civil court and we relegate the parties to approach the civil court seeking appropriate orders. We make it clear that we have not pronounced on the merits of the allegations and the civil Court/Forum shall be free to decide the matter untrammeled by anything contained in this Judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge