IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2011 / 20TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 19322 of 2011(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- JOSEPH, S/O.PONNAYYAN NADAR RESIDING AT MOHANAVILASAM BUNGALOW, KANJIRAMKULAM VILLAGE, KAZHUVOOR PO, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.MOHANA KUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), DSP OFFICE, PMG,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 033. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANJIRAMKULAM POLICE STATION, KANJIRAMKULAM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 524. 3. GIRIJA, W/O.RAVEENDRAN, MELEVILAKATHU KALLUVILA PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, KANJIRAMKULAM VILLAGE.P.O., KAZHUVOOR,NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 524. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. C.M. CHARISMA, R3 BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.19322/2011-M: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ELECTORAL IDENTITY CARD HELD BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ELECTORAL IDENTITY CARD HELD BY THE PETITIONER'S WIFE, VILASINI. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ELECTORAL IDENTITY CARD HELD BY THE PETITIONER'S SON JAYESH (SHOWN AS JOYISH IN THE CARD). EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND HIS WIFE ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION FOR SETTING ASIDE EXPARTE DECREE IN O.S. NO. 2/2001 BEFORE SUB COURT, NEYYATTINKARA. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 02/07/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE R.1. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JJ. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 19322 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose ,J. Petitioner has approached this court seeking protection for his life and for his properties raising various allegations. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the 3rd respondent denying all the allegations. Learned Government Pleader on the basis of the instructions received from the police submitted that issuing direction for police protection cannot be justified. According to the learned Government Pleader property in question was delivered over to the 3rd respondent in execution of a decree to which both the petitioner and the 3rd respondent were parties. But after the delivery the petitioner trespassed into that property and is presently residing in that property. Petitioner has later filed an application for settling the dispute as to which property was delivered. Petitioner has filed fresh suit also. 2. Having considered the rival submissions addressed at the bar as well as the pleadings raised by the parties we are of WP(C) .19322/2011 2 the view that no case is made out for issuance of the police protection direction sought for. The submission of the Government Pleader is that at the moment there is no threat to the life of the petitioner and his family. Government Pleader assured us that in case any complaint is received in future in respect of any threat to the life of the petitioner or any member of the family, such complaint will be promptly enquired into and appropriate action will be taken. We record the above submission. The writ petition is disposed of as above. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C) .19322/2011 3