IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2011 / 11TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 22606 of 2011(A) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- RAJESH KHANNA, S/O.RAVEENDRAN, AGED 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT KANAKALAYAM, VADAKKEVILA P.O., KOLLAM BY SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE, BY ADV, SRI.LEO GEORGE, SRI.K.N.SASIDHARAN NAIR, SMT.BABITHA THAMBI. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE CITY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOLLAM - 691 001. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KOLLAM WEST, KOLLAM-691 001. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLAM WEST, KOLLAM - 691 001. 5. SURESH, S/O.GOPALAN, AYALATH HOUSE, KOTTAKKAKOM, KOLLAM - 695 542. 6. KRISHNA KUMAR, S/O.GOPALAN, AYALATH HOUSE, KOTTAKKAKOM,KOLLAM - 695 542. 7. DEVARAJAN, S/O.GOPALAN, AYALATH HOUSE, KOTTAKKAKOM, KOLLAM - 695 542. 8. RAJENDRAN, S/O.BHASKARAN, HOUSE NO-27, VISHNATHUKAVU NAGAR, VISHNATHUKAVU P.O., KOLLAM-695 541. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.K.VIPINDAS R5 TO R7 BY ADVS. SRI.V.V.RAJA, SRI.R.RANJITH. R8 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH.S.SUBRAHMANIAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/10/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.22606/2011 A APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE LICENCE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX AND COMMERCIAL TAXES, KOLLAM DTD. 20/03/2010. P2: COPY OF THE LICENCE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY KOLLAM CORPORATION DTD. 22/02/2010. P3: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DISTRICT COURT, KOLLAM IN CRL.M.P.NO.2831/2010 DTD. 4/11/2010. P4: COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME O.392. P5: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT AS CRL.M.P.NO.4826/2011 DTD. 20/06/2011. P6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT DTD. 20/07/2011. P7: COPY OF THE REFER REPORT N CRIME NO.1171 OF 2010 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION DTD. 9/10/2010. P8: COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN O.S.NO.115 OF 2010 DTD. 21/07/2010. P9: COPY OF THE ST.NO.133 OF 2008 FILED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KOLLAM DTD. 12/12/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R5(A): COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1171/2010 DTD.21/07/2010 FO THE KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION DTD. 21/07/2010. R5(B): COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1188/2010 DTD. 26/07/2010 OF THE KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION DTD. 26/07/2010. R5(C): COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.843/2010 DTD. 19/10/2010 OF THE KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION DTD. 19/10/2010. R5(D): COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.472/2010 DTD. 10/06/2010 OF THE KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION DTD. 10/06/2010. R5(E): COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.115/2010 DTD. 9/02/2010. R5(F): A NEWS ITEM REPORTED IN THE MANORAMA DAILY DTD. 12/06/2010. R5(G): COPY OF THE REPORT DTD. 24/01/2011 ISSUED TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT FROM THE RCC THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No. 22606 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT Abdul Rehim , J. Averments in the writ petition are to the effect that, the petitioner is providing financial services at Kollam, under the name and style 'R.K.Finance'. There exists monetary dispute between the petitioner and the 5th respondent. It is alleged that the 5th respondent is not returning documents which were entrusted with him, even after settling payment of amounts borrowed. It is further stated that the 5th respondent caused his wife to file a private complaint against the petitioner alleging offences punishable sections 306 and 420 IPC. and the petitioner had taken anticipatry bail in that case. Thereafter, respondents 5 to 8 with the help of some hired persons had illegally confined him and assaulted. Their attempt to abduct the petitioner was not successful since two police constables came to the scene. WPC.No.22606/2011 2 Even though a criminal case was registered as crime No.392/2011 of Kollam West Police Station, all the requisite offences were not included and accused against the offenders. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a complaint before the Magistrate Court, and it is pending adjudication. But it is alleged that threat and intimidation from the side of the 5th respondent is continuing and the petitioner and his employees are prevented from continuing their business activities. Even though the petitioner submitted Ext.P6 representation preferred before the 2nd respondent, the police authorities are not taking any effective steps to protect the life of the petitioner. Hence this writ petition is filed seeking directions from this court for police protection to the life of the petitioner and his employees and for conduct of his business. 2. In the counter affidavit filed by respondents 5 to 7, it is indicated that the petitioner is accused in so many criminal cases. Copies of FIRs in those cases are produced as Exts.R5(a) to R5 (d). The respondents have also produced copy of the plaint in OS N.115/2010 in which the petitioner is the defendant. However, it is conceded that respondents 5 to 7 are not causing WPC.No.22606/2011 3 any threat or intimidation to the life of the petitioner or his employees, as alleged. On the other hand it is contended that the attempt of the petitioner is only to resist the lawfull actions which will be initiated against him on the basis of the criminal cases registered, under the guise of the order of police protection. It is submitted by Sri.Raja Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel appearing for respondents 5 to 7, that steps have already been initiated on the basis of recommendations of the police officials concerned to implicate the petitioner in proceedings under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007. 3. Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4 submitted that, the petitioner is accused in so many criminal cases and that the allegations raised in the writ petition against respondents 5 to 8 are not true and correct. It is stated that no threat to the life of the petitioner exists as alleged. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances and also the rival contentions raised, we are convinced that there exists some disputes between the petitioner and the 5th respondent. The parties will be at liberty to sort out such disputes through lawfull manner by approaching the competent forum. But neither the WPC.No.22606/2011 4 petitioner nor respondents 5 to 8 have no manner of right to create any breach of peace or violence on the basis of such dispute. We dispose of this writ petition directing respondents 3 and 4 to keep vigil over the situation and to ensure that the dispute between the parties is not giving rise to any situation of breach of peace or violence and that no threat to the life of the petitioner as well as respondents 5 to 8 is caused from either side. If there is any intimation regarding any possibility of violence, the above said respondents shall take appropriate and effective steps to prevent the same. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE. dpk WPC.No.22606/2011 5 PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE. dpk