IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2011 / 6TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 15476 of 2011(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- BABY M.JOHN, MANGALATHU PUTHEN PURAYIL, THYKAVU, THOPPUMPADY P.O., KOCHI-682 005. BY ADV. SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, KOCHI - 682 011. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THOPPUMPADY POLICE STATION, THOPPUMPADY P.O., KOCHI-682 005. 3. T.A.MAJEED, GREEN WATER, THYKAVU, THOPPUMPADY P.O., KOCHI-682 005. 4. NIAZAR, THYKKAVU VEEDU, THOPPUMPADY P.O., KOCHI-682 005. 5. SHAMEER, S/O.SHERIFF, THYKKAVU VEEDU, THOPPUMPADY P.O., KOCHI-682 005 (NOW RESIDING AT AMMAVI MUKKU, NEAR CHEMPITTA PALLY, PALLURUTHI). R1 TO R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. C.M. CHARISMA R3 BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 15476 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 : COPY OF THE RAATION CARD IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. P2 : COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE CORPORATION OF KOCHI. P3 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19.05.2011 FILED BEFORE THE COLLECTOR. P4 : COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 7.6.2011 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P6 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE INJUNCTION ORDER PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, KOCHI. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE smvd R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.15476 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th June, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 3 to 5 to afford police protection to the petitioner against threat/harm to his life and property. 2. According to the petitioner, he is in absolute unquestioned physical possession of 15 cents of land with the constructions therein. According to him, admittedly, this property is puramboke land belonging to the Government, but his father and after him, the petitioner is in continuous uninterrupted possession and occupation of the property and the buildings therein. According to the petitioner, respondents 3 to 5 actuated by malafides are attempting to interfere with the peaceful possession of the property by the petitioner causing manifold difficulties to the petitioner. They are trying to encroach upon the property in the possession of the petitioner after WPC ;No.15476 of 2011 2 demolishing the existing compound wall and a gate. There has been partial damage already by their conduct. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner has come to this Court. 3. Service is complete. Respondents 3 to 5 have entered appearance through counsel. Counsel submits that respondents 3 to 5 are in no way interested in this dispute at all. Respondents 3 to 5 undertake that they shall not in any way pose any threat to the life or person of the petitioner. They shall not interfere with his alleged possession over the 15 cents of land. They are not interested in such disputes. The local people, according to respondents 3 to 5, appear to be agitated by the attitude and conduct of the petitioner. They are raising objections. Conveniently, respondents 3 to 5 have been arrayed and the attempt is to run away with an order of police protection against respondents 3 to 5 so that the same can be profitably used to coerce others. The learned counsel for respondents 3 to 5 submits that respondents 3 to 5 have no objection whatsoever against the petitioner keeping his alleged possession of 15 cents of land. They WPC ;No.15476 of 2011 3 have no intention to cause any threat to the life or person of the petitioner. In these circumstances, the prayer for relief under Article 226 of the Constitution may be rejected, it is prayed. 4. We turned to the learned Government Pleader for submissions. The learned Government Pleader submits that on the complaint received from the petitioner, crime No.1466 of 2011 has been registered against respondents 3 to 5 herein raising allegations inter alia under Sections 447, 427 and 506(ii) of the IPC. Investigation is in progress. The learned Government Pleader however submits that in the perception of respondents 1 and 2, there is no threat to the life or person of the petitioner. It is true that there are certain civil disputes between the parties. We are informed that the petitioner has already approached the civil court. In these circumstances, the learned Government Pleader submits that necessary action shall be taken against respondents 3 to 5, if there be any contumacious and violent conduct on their part against the petitioner contrary to the undertaking given before Court. But no specific directions under Article 226 WPC ;No.15476 of 2011 4 of the Constitution are necessary, submits the learned Government Pleader. Parties may be directed to approach the civil court to get their civil disputes settled by resort to ordinary civil litigative process, submits the learned Government Pleader. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner in reply submits that subsequent to the filing of this petition, on 8.6.2011 the petitioner was obliged to approach the civil court and the civil court has already passed an order of injunction against respondents 3 to 5 and others from trespassing into the plaint schedule property or committing any waste therein until further orders. A Commission has been taken out from the civil court and the Commissioner has already submitted his report before the civil court, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. Observations of the Commissioner support the case of the petitioner, it is further pointed out. 6. We have considered all the relevant inputs. The petitioner has already approached the civil court and the civil court has passed interim orders. We have no reason to assume that the order of the civil court shall not be WPC ;No.15476 of 2011 5 obeyed and respected. If there is any violation of the order of the civil court, needless to say that the petitioner shall be entitled to complain to the civil court and it is for the civil court to take appropriate further action in accordance with law. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that no directions for grant of police protection to protect the property of the petitioner need be issued by this Court now. We will assume that the civil court which has granted relief in favour of the petitioner shall take necessary action, if there be any violation of the interim order passed. At any rate our extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution need not be invoked, we are satisfied. 7. Coming to the grievance of the possible threat to the life and person of the petitioner, we take note of and record the undertaking given by the learned counsel for respondents 3 to 5 that they shall not in any way indulge in any contumacious or culpable conduct against the petitioner. We do however note the submissions of the learned Government Pleader that a crime has been registered against respondents 3 to 5. We further take WPC ;No.15476 of 2011 6 note of and record the submission of the learned Government Pleader that if there be any contumacious and violent conduct on the part of the respondents 3 to 5 contrary to the undertaking given before this Court, the police shall take necessary action against respondents 3 to 5 and to afford protection to the life and person of the petitioner. We are satisfied that no further directions on that aspect need be issued by this Court in the light of the submissions. 8. In the result, a) We accept the submissions of the learned Government Pleader recorded above. b) We are satisfied that no further specific directions under Article 226 of the Constitution need now be issued. c) This petition is accordingly dismissed with the above observations. sd/- R.BASANT JUDGE sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/ true copy P.S.TO JUDGE