IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2011 / 22ND POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 33525 of 2010(M) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. SINDHU, W/O.KASMIL,RESIDING AT KOCHUVEETTIL VADAKKETHIL, CHERUSSERY BHAGAM, PANMANA VILLAGE, CHAVARA P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. BEN, S/O.KASMIL,DO. DO. 3. ALPHONSA, W/O.BEN, DO. DO. 4. STEPHEN, S/O.BEN,DO. DO. 5. BERNAD SHAH, S/O.BEN,DO. DO. 6. JAMES, S/O.LEON,RESIDING AT JENSI BHAVAN, CHERUSSERY BHAGAM, CHAVARA P.O.,KOLLAM DISTRICT. 7. SUSHEELA, W/O.JAMES, DO. DO. 8. JENSON, S/O.JAMES, DO. DO. BY ADVS. SRI.B.BIPIN SRI.N.SUNIL JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHAVARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691001. 2. RAVEENDRAN,S/O.NARAYANAN, AGED 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT THENGGIRATTAYIL VEEDU, THEJUZ, VENMINAMTHARA, MEYKADU MURI, CHAVARA P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT-691001. 3. MEENAKUMARI,W/O.RAVEENDRAN, AGED 44 YEARS, DO. DO., PIN-691001. 4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691001. R1 AND R4 BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.CHARISHMA R2-3 BY ADVS. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW SRI.JOHNSON K.KURIEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs WP(C).No. 33525/2010(M) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. NO.169/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT AT KARUNAGAPALLY. P2: COPY OF THE WRITTEN STAEMENT IN O.S. NO.169/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT AT KARUNAGAPALLY. P3: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20/07/2009 IN I.A. NO.584/2009 IN O.S. NO.169/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT AT KARUNAGAPALLY. P4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 30/10/2010 FILED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 30/10/2010 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE svs R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 33525 of 2010-M ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioners have come to this Court with this petition under Art.226 of the Constitution complaining about harassment by the police. According to the petitioners, there is a pathway and the petitioners are using the said pathway. Respondents 2 and 3 are neighbours. They have raised objections against the use of the pathway by the petitioners. The 2nd respondent has filed a suit before the Munsiff's Court, Karunagapally, showing petitioners 2 and 6 as defendants and by an interim order passed by the Munsiff's Court, Karunagapally, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P3, the petitioners have been permitted to use the pathway for the ingress and egress till the disposal of the suit. But they are restrained by an order of temporary W.P.(C) No. 33525 of 2010 -: 2 :- injunction from widening the existing pathway and from plying vehicles through it and also from committing mischief therein till the disposal of the suit. 2. The short grievance of the petitioners is that respondents 2 and 3 who wield influence with the 1st respondent are not permitting the petitioners to use the pathway. The 1st respondent is harassing the petitioners misusing his police power and is compelling the petitioners not to use the pathway in question for egress and ingress. This amounts to gross abuse of the powers of the police. If the 2nd respondent has a grievance that the petitioners have violated the order of the court, it is upto them to initiate proceedings before the court concerned for violation of the order of injunction. But the 1st respondent may not be permitted to be law into himself and decide whether the petitioners can use the pathway or not. The petitioners undertake that the pathway shall be used strictly in accordance with the terms of the order produced as Ext.P3. 3. Respondents 2 and 3 have entered appearance through counsel. Counsel submits that the petitioners are violating the W.P.(C) No. 33525 of 2010 -: 3 :- order. They have already violated the order and petitions have already been filed to take action against the petitioners for violation of the order of injunction and to get the order of injunction enforced with police aid. Those petitions are pending before the court below. At this juncture, no directions for police protection may be issued, prays the learned counsel respondents 2 and 3. 4. The learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3 submits that pendency of such petitions are not revealed in this petition filed by the petitioners and the attempt on their part is to secure some orders which would deter the court which passed Ext.P3 order from enforcing the order. 5. The learned Government Pleader, after taking instructions, submits that the 1st respondent shall not in any way interfere with the right of the petitioners to use the pathway for their ingress and egress in accordance with the terms of Ext.P3 order. In these circumstances, no directions are necessary in this petition, it is submitted. 6. We have gone through Ext.P3 order. It unmistakably W.P.(C) No. 33525 of 2010 -: 4 :- stipulates that the defendants in the suit and consequently the petitioners have the right to use the pathway for ingress and egress. Their right under the order cannot be frustrated by the 1st respondent. The grievance of the petitioners that under the influence of respondents 2 and 3, the 1st respondent is interfering with the use of the pathway as ingress and egress deserves to be viewed seriously. We expect the 4th respondent to look into the matter and ensure that the alleged harassment is not permitted to continue. We do not intend to fetter the discretion or powers of the civil court to pass appropriate orders on merits after hearing both sides on the application for action for violation of the order of injunction or for providing police aid to strictly enforce Ext.P3 order. Appropriate orders shall have to be passed by the civil court in accordance with law on such petitions. 7. This petition is, in these circumstances, allowed in part. It is made clear that the 1st respondent at the instance of respondents 2 and 3 or otherwise shall not in any way obstruct the right of the petitioners to use the pathway in terms of Ext.P3 W.P.(C) No. 33525 of 2010 -: 5 :- order. If the petitioners have any complaint of harassment, they shall be at liberty to complain to the 4th respondent who must take necessary action in the matter. We leave open the right of the petitioners and respondents 2 and 3 to seek appropriate further directions from the civil court for the proper implementation of Ext.P3 order. 8. This writ petition is, in these circumstances, allowed to the above extent. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge