IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2010 / 22ND ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 27530 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, S/O. PUNAM CHAND JAIN, BUSINESS, RADHA NIVAS, BUILDING NO.KCXL1 1/5 10 (NEW NO. KLIII 539) CONVENT ROAD, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.SUDHEESHKAR SRI. K.SIJU SRI.PRATHEESH.P SRI.A.MUHAMMED RAFFI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM. 691 001 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION.691 001 3. NAUSHAD, PRINCE KIDS WEARS, BEACH ROAD, NEAR BENCIGAR HOSPITAL, KOLLAM - 691 001. 4. NAGEER, S/O. KADEEJA BEEVI, NAGEERA MANZIL, BEACH NORTH, KOLLAM. 5. GIRIRAJ KABRA, 1ST FLOOR, RADHA NIVAS, BUILDING NO.KCXL1 1/5 10 (NEW NO.KLIII 539), CONVENT ROAD, KOLLAM. 691 001. ADV. SRI.T.R.RAJAN FOR R3 & 4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPIN DAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WPC NO.27530 OF 2010 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE RENT DEED DATED 20/10/2009. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 30/8/2010 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLAM EAST. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.3654/CAMP/PTN/2010-Q DATED 24/09/2010 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.N272/10 DATED 24/09/2010 ISSUED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLAM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R(4)(a): TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION DATED 16/9/2010 IN I.A.NO.3494/2010 IN O.S.NO.654 OF 2010 ON THE FILES OF THE SUB COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.R(4)(b): TRUE COPY OF THE ATTACHMENT WARRANT DATED 23/09/2010 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL NAZIR, SUB COURT, KOLLAM PURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF ATTACHMENT DATED 18/9/2010. // True Copy// PA to Judge K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.C.No.27530 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of October 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.JOSEPH,J The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ order or direction commanding respondents 1 and 2 to afford adequate and effective police protection to the life of the petitioner without being obstructed in any fashion either by respondents 3 to 5 or any other persons engineered by them. ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ order or direction commanding respondents 1 and 2 to afford adequate and effective police protection to the smooth functioning of business of the petitioner in Radha Nivas, Building No.KCXL1 1/5 10 (New No.KLIII 539) Convent Road, Kollam without being obstructed in any fashion either by respondents 3 to 5 or any other persons engineered by them. iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ order or direction commanding respondents 1 and 2 to take action pursuant to Ext.P2 petition forthwith. W.P.C.No.27530 of 2010 2 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: 3. The petitioner is conducting business in Cloth materials for the past nine months on the strength of an agreement of lease (Ext.P1). Petitioner's brother had some financial transactions with the respondents. Due to some set back in the business, petitioner's brother had defaulted payment to respondents 3 to 5. He sought time for settlement of accounts. The respondents are now pressuring the petitioner to pay off the liabilities of his brother. It is alleged that on 30/08/2010, respondents 3 to 5, along with their henchmen, trespassed into the shop room of the petitioner and threatened that he will be done away if the loan amount is not paid within 7 days. The intruders were shouting filthy language and abusing the petitioner. Respondents 3 to 5 forcefully locked the shop which stocks cloth materials worth Rs.15,00,000/-. The petitioner filed Ext.P2 complaint. 4. Counter affidavit has been filed by respondents 3 and 4. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner has not produced copy of license issued by the local authority on Sales Tax Registration. Petitioner's brother was conducting business in the nearby premises for quite some time. The petitioner was W.P.C.No.27530 of 2010 3 also assisting him. Petitioner's brother stopped the business and shifted the textile stock to the premises wherein the petitioner is claiming that he is conducting business. His brother has cheated innumerable residents and is now absconding. A sum of Rs.15 lakhs is due to the 3rd respondent from the petitioner's brother and his brother issued a cheque for the said amount. The attempt of the petitioner seems to be to take stock in the Radha Nivas and decamp to his native place. The cheque issued by his brother bounced and notice is being sent. 5. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit producing Exts.P3 to P5. It is stated in the reply affidavit that respondents 3 to 5 and their hired goons trespassed into the rented building and broke open the lock and committed theft. The petitioner has filed Ext.P3 complaint; but there was no action on the part of the police. The 3rd respondent has not filed a suit till date against the petitioner. 6. Subsequently, respondents have filed I.A.No.14353/2010 seeking to accept certain documents. Ext.R4 (A) in the I.A is a copy of the suit for money and Ext.R4(b) is a copy of the attachment warrant issued by the Central Nazir, Sub Court, Kollam. W.P.C.No.27530 of 2010 4 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. This is a matter where, admittedly, the party respondents have filed a civil suit and attachment is also obtained. The respondents have a case that the petitioner is being used by his brother. According to the respondents, this is a case of abuse of process of court. In the nature of the allegations made by the parties, we do not think that there may be a proper case to grant the relief of police protection as such. However, we direct that if the petitioner has filed complaints disclosing commission of any cognizable offence, the official respondents shall take action in accordance with law. 8. We also record the submission of the learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4 that they will only proceed with the matter in accordance with law and will not cause any threat to the life of the petitioner. We further direct that if the matter comes before any Civil court/forum, the court/forum shall decide the matter untrammeled by anything contained in this judgment. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.C.No.27530 of 2010 5 W.P.C.No.27530 of 2010 6 W.P.C.No.27530 of 2010 7 K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 30/082010