IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.V.K.BALI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.RAMACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2007 / 22ND PAUSHA 1928 Con.Case(C).No. 1579 of 2006(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.28897/2005 Dated 24/10/2005 .................... PETITINER: ------------ C.V.GIREESH KUMAR, S/O.NARAYANAN NAMBIAR, AGED 33 YEARS, VAZHIPADU CLERK, SREE AKLIATH SIVA KSHETHRAM, AZHIKODE P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. BALAKRISHNAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, S.I. OF POLICE, VALAPATANAM P.O., KANNUR. 2. C.H.RAVEENDRAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, PRESIDENT, SREE AKLIATH SIVA KSHETHRA SEVA SAMITHY AZHIKODE P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. P.K.BALAKRISHNAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SECRETARY, SREE AKLIATH SIVA KSHETHRA SEVA SAMITHY AZHIKODE P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.T.B.HOOD THIS CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/01/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.K. BALI, C.J. & M.RAMACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- Cont.Case (C) No.1579 of 2006 ------------------------------- Dated, this the 12th day of January, 2007 JUDGMENT V.K.Bali,C.J.(Oral) The direction stated to be not being complied with given by order dated 24th October, 2005 in W.P.(C) No.28897 of 2005 reads thus: “This is a petition for police protection. On 14.10.2005 we have issued a direction to the police to see that if petitioner is an employee, not suspended from service, his entry into the temple shall not be prevented. On instructions, learned Government Pleader submitted that people who are obstructed were called to the police station and they signed an undertaking that they will not create any obstruction. Therefore, police is directed to give sufficient protection as and when necessary. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.” 2. On instructions, Mr.T.B.Hood, learned Government Pleader, states that the occurrence took place at a time when the two constables deputed to protect the petitioner happened to be away as they were to go to the Police Station, as otherwise, Cont.Case © No.1579/2006 2 protection was provided to the petitioner on that day itself and that is being continued to be provided with. In view of the statement made by the learned Government Pleader which is not refuted, we do not think that any contempt has been made. This contempt case is closed. V.K. BALI, CHIEF JUSTICE. M.RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE. vns