IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL THURSDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 30623 of 2011(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABRAHAM.P.P., S/O.YOHANNAN PATHROSE, PLANTHARA PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, PARUMALA P.O., KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.VINOD J.DEV SRI.PRAMOD J.DEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA-689 121. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNAR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-689 622. 4. P.D.ISAAC, MANALEL PUTHEN VEEDU, MANNAR P.O., KURITTISSERY VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-689 622. 5. ANU BABY, MANALEL PUTHEN VEEDU, MANNAR P.O., KURITTISSERY VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-689 622. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.30623/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 11/11/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 11/11/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 11/11/2011 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No. 30623 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioner, who is conducting a lodge at Mannar, has approached this court seeking police protection for his life from what is described as threats and contumacious acts of respondents 4 and 5. It is submitted that the 4th respondent is a neighbour with whom there was a dispute over the property. There is bad blood between the petitioner and the 4th respondent as a result of which the 4th respondent and his nephew the 5th respondent are perpetrating illegalities arousing fear in the mind of the petitioner and difficulties to the petitioner and inmates of the petitioner's lodge. 2. We are not inclined to examine the correctness of the averments in the writ petition. As Ext.P2 complaint is apparently pending before the 3rd respondent Sub Inspector of Police, we are of the view that limited relief can be given to the petitioner in the following terms even without issuing notice to the respondents. WPC.No.30623/2011 2 3. As directed by us, Sri.Dhanesh Mathew Manjooran learned Government Pleader has taken notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 and we have heard him also. 4. The 3rd respondent is directed to take up Ext.P2 complaint immediately and to conduct a thorough enquiry into the same. As part of the enquiry, the 3rd respondent can summon or meet respondents 4 and 5 . If the enquiry reveals that the allegations in Ext.P2 are correct, the 3rd respondent will take such action as is necessary for protecting the lives and limbs of the petitioner as well as the inmates of his lodge. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K. HARILAL, JUDGE. dpk