IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 17TH JULY 2008 / 26TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 14132 of 2008(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M.JALALUDEEN , T.C. 46/449 (OLD) BEEMAPALLI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE POONTHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. AMEER HAMSA, SECRETARY BEEMA PALLI, MUSLIM JAMATH BEEMA PALLI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 4. M.K.M., ISMAIL, PRESIDENT BEEMA PALLI, MUSLIM JAMATH BEEMA PALLI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 5. ZIYAD, S/O. A.A. SALA, SAHIB BEEMA PALLI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 6. KASIM, S/O. YAKOOK T.C. 45/391,. BEEMAPALLI THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.PRADEEP FOR R3-6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.14132/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.30.4.2008 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT EVIDENCING THE RECEIPT OF EXT.P1 COMPLAINT. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.14132 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner submits he and his family are members of Kerala Nadavathul Mujahudeen, which is an organisation of progressive and forward looking Muslims. The respondents 3 to 6 are the office bearers of Beemapalli Juma-ath. They belong to the Sunni faction. They are opposing the organisation of the petitioner for the reason that it is criticising superstitious religious rites of the said respondents like celebration of Uroos etc. The petitioner solemnized his son Fazaludeen's marriage on 24.4.2008 under the auspices of his organisation. It was done in accordance with Islamic custom and practice. But, the marriage was conducted without the co-operation of the respondents 3 to 6. Therefore, they took a decision to excommunicate the petitioner and his family members. Announcements were made through loudspeakers in the five mosques under the control of the respondents 3 to 6 on 28.4.2008 about the excommunication of the petitioner and his W.P.(C) No.14132/2008 2 family. The public were asked not to co-operate with them, in any manner. Further, the respondents 3 to 6 formed themselves into an unlawful assembly along with a few other people, came to the petitioner's residence, threatened and abused him using filthy language. He was asked to shift his residence from the jurisdiction of Beemapalli Juma-ath, failing which, he was threatened with dire consequences. Confronted with the above aggressive and illegal activities of the said respondents, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P1 representation before the police seeking necessary protection to the life of the petitioner and his family members. When the police did not take any action, this writ petition was filed. Pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court on 6.5.2008, the police is extending necessary protection to the petitioner. 2. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that in view of the hostility of the local people against the petitioner and his family members necessary protection is being rendered by them. W.P.(C) No.14132/2008 3 3. The respondents 3 to 6 have filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations against them. They deny the allegation of excommunication or the public call allegedly made by them not to co-operate with the petitioner or his family members. According to them, the petitioner moved for permission to solemnize the marriage of his son in the Juma-ath. Upon realising that the bride is below the age of 18 years, permission was declined. The consistent practice of Beemapalli Juma-ath was to give permission for the marriage, if only, the girl is a major. The said respondents further submitted that they have no intention, whatsoever, to physically harm the petitioner. They also say that the petitioner is now misusing the police protection to enter the precincts of the mosques, for which he has no authority. When the petitioner and his family members are residing in their house and going around attending their usual business, if the respondents 3 to 6 or their supporters are causing any obstruction or threatening them, they may inform the police. In that event, the police shall extend necessary protection to them. W.P.(C) No.14132/2008 4 Having regard to the facts of the case, the police shall keep surveillance in the area where the petitioner is residing, so as to avoid any untoward incident. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) ps