IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2011 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 35773 of 2010(V) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- STEPHEN BERNARD,S/O.VARGHESE STEPHEN, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR,PADINJARE KADAVILM,REBIN DALE, VELLIMON CHERRY,PERINAD VILLAGE, VELLIMON WEST PO, PERINAD , KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT POLICE SUPERINTENDENT, KOLLAM. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNDARA P.O., KOLLAM. 4. GEORGE, GIM NIVAS, KUREEPUZHA CHERRY, THRIKKADAVOOR VILLAGE, KUREEPUZHA PO, PERINAD, KOLLAM. 5. KUNJUMOL,W/O.GEORGE,GIM NIVAS, KUREEPIZHA CHERRY,THRIKKADVOOR VILLAGE, KUREEPUZHA PO, PERINAD, KOLLAM. 6. AJAYAN @SUMESH,S/O.ANTONY,AJAYA NIVAS, PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO, PERINAD,KOLLAM 691 601. 7. UNNIKRISHNAN,S/O.THANKAPPANACHARI, KUZHIYATHU VADAKKATTIL VEEDU, PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO, PERINAD, KOLLAM 691 601. 8. JIMMI GEORGE,S/O.GEORGE, JIM NIVAS,KUREEPUZHA CHERRY,THRIKKADAVOOR VILLAGE, KUREEPUZHA PO, PERINAD , KOLLAM. svs ..........2/-... ...2... WPC.NO.35773/2010 9. VIJAYAKUMAR,S/O.NEELAKANTAN, VIJO HOUSE, PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO,PERINAD, KOLLAM 691 601. 10. SHAJI,S/O.BENNACHAN,KARIKKAPUZHA VADAKKATHIL,PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO,PERINAD, KOLLAM 691 601. 11. RAJESH,S/O.RAJENDRAN,SASTHAMNIRATHU VEEDU,PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO,PERINAD, KOLLAM 691 601. 12. VIJAYAKUMAR,S/O.ARJUNAN,KALLUVILA VADAKKATHIL,PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO,PERINAD, KOLLAM 691 601. 13. JYOTHIS VIJAYAN,S/O.VIJAYAN, VIJO HOUSE,PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO,PERINAD, KOLLAM 691 601. 14. JOSE PRAKASH,S/O. ABRAHAM, KIZHAKKEKALLINGAL VEEDU, PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO,PERINAD, KOLLAM 691 601. 15. JIJO FERNADES,S/O.FERNADES, JOJO BHAVANAM,PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO,PERINAD, KOLLAM. 16. JAYAN,S/O.VINCENT,JAYA BHAVANAM, PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO,PERINAD, KOLLAM 691 601. 17. SHAJI,S/O.MERSALI,ODUKKATTUVILA THEKKATHIL,PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO,PERINAD, KOLLAM 691 601. 18. ANOTNY,S/O.ABRAHAM,AJAYA NIVAS, KUZHIYATHUMUKKU,PERUMON CHERRY, PANAYAM VILLAGE, PERUMON PO,PERINAD, KOLLAM 691 601. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA R4-5 BY ADVS. SRI.B.MOHANLAL SRI.SAIJU S. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 35773/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1221/2007 OF ANCHALUMMOOD SRO. P2: COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1251/2010 OF ANCHALUMMOOD POLICE STATION. P3: COPY OF THE SCAN REPORT DATED 13/11/2010 OF THE PETITIONER. P4: COPY OF THE TREATMENT SUMMARY DATED 24/11/2010. P5: COPYOF THE COMPLAINT DATED 18/11/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE WIFE OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R4(a):COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03/11/2010 IN I.A. NO.4346/2010 IN O.S.NO.780/2010 OF THE SUB COURT, KOLLAM. R4(b):COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.120/2010 OF ANCHALUMMOODU POLICE STATION UNDER SECTION 420 OF I.P.C. AND SECTION 13 OF THE KERALA MONEY LENDERS ACT. R4(c):COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM APPEARED IN THE MALAYALA MANORAMA, DESABHIMANI AND JANAYUGAM. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.35773 of 2010-V ***************************** Dated this the 29th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of directions to respondents 1 to 3 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to afford protection to the petitioner from the apprehended contumacious, culpable and violent conduct of respondents 4 to 18. 2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner and his family are residing in Mumbai. They want to come to Kollam and settle down there. For this purpose, an item of property was purchased from the 5th respondent by the petitioner under Ext.P1. It is the further case of the petitioner that after the sale, the property was given on lease to respondents 4 and 5 for their residence. Respondents 4 and 5 disputed the rights of the petitioner under Ext.P1 assignment deed. They claimed to be in possession and filed civil suit. Admittedly interim orders have been passed in favour of respondents 4 and 5 in that suit. 3. The petitioner has also filed a Rent Control Petition claiming eviction of respondents 4 and 5 from the building in W.P(C) No.35773 of 2010-V 2 Ext.P1 property which allegedly was leased back to them after Ext.P1. That petition for eviction is also pending. 4. The petitioner's claim in that petition has nothing to do with the civil dispute between the parties, submits counsel. But the petitioner complains of and apprehends violent, contumacious and culpable conduct on the part of respondents 4 to 18 against the petitioner on account of the animosity arising from the civil dispute. 5. Respondents 4 to 18 have been served. Respondent No.4, 5 and 8 have appeared through a counsel. The learned counsel for respondents 4, 5 and 8 submits that it is incorrect to say that the 5th respondent had executed any document of assignment in favour of the petitioner's wife. Signature in a document does not appear to be disputed. But definitely there is a dispute that any such document of assignment has been executed. Respondents 4, 5 and 8 stoutly deny the execution of any lease deed or existence of any lease arrangement between the petitioner/his wife and respondents 4 and 5. Respondents 4 and 5 assert categorically that they have no intention whatsoever to indulge in any violent conduct against the petitioner. According to them, the boot is on the other leg. The petitioner, W.P(C) No.35773 of 2010-V 3 who is said to be part of a real estate Mafia, is trying to vex and harass respondents 4 and 5. In violation of the order of injunction of the civil court, the petitioner is attempting to trespass into the property and attack respondents 4 and 5. The local people had come to the rescue of respondents 4 and 5 against the illegal acts of the petitioner and his henchmen and that is why all other respondents have been arrayed as parties. The categoric assertion/undertaking of respondents 4, 5 and 8 that they shall get their disputes resolved in the proceedings initiated before the civil courts and shall not in any manner cause any harm or threat to the life or person of the petitioner, may be taken note of and recorded. No directions under Art.226 of the Constitution can, need or deserve to be issued, in these circumstances, submits the learned counsel for respondents 4, 5 and 8. 6. The learned Government Pleader submits that the parties are involved in a civil dispute. There are allegations and counter allegations. At any rate, the police shall maintain law and order. It is not necessary to issue any directions under Art.226 of the Constitution. If there be any threat against the life or person of the petitioner, adequate steps shall be taken by W.P(C) No.35773 of 2010-V 4 the police, submits the learned Government Pleader. 7. We have considered all the relevant circumstances. It is now evident that there is a civil dispute between the parties. The validity of Ext.P1 is questioned. The existence of the lease arrangement between the petitioner and respondents 4 and 5 is disputed. Both parties have claimed relief from the civil court. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that it is not necessary for the police to intervene in the civil dispute between the parties. Parties will have to abide by the orders of the civil court - interim as well as final. 8. Coming to the threat allegedly perceived by the petitioner against his life and person, we take note of the submission of the learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 as also the submission of the learned Government Pleader. 9. Maintenance of law and order and prevention of commission of crimes as also necessary action, if any crime is committed, are the duties of the police. They have to discharge such duty even without any specific directions from the Court. When exceptional circumstances are shown to exist, this Court may invoke its powers under Art.226 of the Constitution to issue specific directions to the police to abate threat to the life of the W.P(C) No.35773 of 2010-V 5 individuals or to ensure that law and order is maintained. In the facts and circumstances of this case where the parties have already approached the civil court, we are not persuaded to agree that any specific directions can, need or deserve to be issued. We accept the submission of the learned counsel for respondents 4, 5 and 8. We do also accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader. 10. This writ petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed. However, we may hasten to observe that in coming to this decision, we place heavy reliance on the submission of the learned counsel for respondents 4, 5 and 8 that respondents 4, 5 and 8 shall not in any way pose any threat to the life or person of the petitioner as also the submission of the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 that if there be any threat against the life or person of the petitioner, necessary action shall be taken by the police in the matter. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/