IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2011 / 16TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17831 of 2011(D) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. JAMEELA, W/O.MOIDEEN HAJI, AGED 38 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE, RESIDING AT 264- KOTTAYIL HOUSE, CHOMAYIL PARAMBU,VALAVANNOOR.P.O., KALPAKANCHERY PS., TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. SAJITHA, WIFE OF IKMON, AGED 19 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE, RESIDING AT 264- KOTTAYIL HOUSE, CHOMAYIL PARAMBU,VALAVANNOOR.P.O., KALPAKANCHERY PS., TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. MASHOORA, D/O.JAMEELA & MOIDEEN HAJI, AGED 16 YEARS, STUDENT, RESIDING AT 264- KOTTAYIL HOUSE, CHOMAYIL PARAMBU,VALAVANNOOR.P.O., KALPAKANCHERY PS., TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. ASGAR ALI, AGED 17 YEARS, S/O.JAMEELA & MOIDEEN HAJI, STUDENT, RESIDING AT 264 - KOTTAYIL HOUSE, CHOMAYIL PARAMBU, VALAVANNOOR.P.O., KALPAKANCHERY PS., TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.(PETITIONERS 3 &4 MINOR,REP.BY MOTHER & NATURAL GUARDIAN (IST PETITIONER) BY ADVS. SRI.M.P.KRISHNAN NAIR SRI.ANIYANKUNJU VARGHESE svs .............2/-.... ...2... WPC.NO.17831/2011 RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 695 001. 2. SECRETARY, HOME DEPT., SECRETARIAT, TRIVADNRUM. 695 001. 3. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, TRIVANDRUM. 695 001. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 676 505. 5. SUPDT.OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM. 676 505. 6. DY.SUPDT.OF POLICE, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 676 101. 7. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VALANCHERY. 676 552. 8. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALPAKANCHERY. 676 551. 9. MOHAMMED MUSALIYAR, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, KHATIF, VALAVANNOOR MAHALLU COMMITTEE, OLD JUMA ATH PALLI, VALAVANNOOR.P.O., KALPAKANCHERY PS., TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 676 551. 10. ABUBACKER MUSALIYAR, USTAD (TEACHER), VALAVANNOOR MAHALLU COMMITTEE, OLD JUMA ATH PALLI, VALAVANNOOR.P.O., KALPAKANCHERY PS., TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 676 551. R1 TO R8 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 17831/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 08/06/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CI OF POLICE P2: COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.227/11. P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28/06/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE ASSTT. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KOZHIKODE. P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28/06/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE POLICE. P5: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE INCIDENT. P6: COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT APPEARED IN MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DATED 27/06/2011. P7: COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT APPEARED IN MADHYAMAM DAILY DATED 28/06/2011. P8: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 01/07/2011 ALONG WITH THE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER, DATED 01/07/2011 IN WPC. NO.17831/2011. P9: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04/07/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER TO THE 8TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.17831 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. This writ petition is filed by an old lady along with her daughter in law and her children, seeking protection for their lives and also for their properties, particularly the 'makham' and the 'tombs' which exists on the properties from what is alleged in the writ petition to be illegal actions by respondents 9 and 10. The petitioners have a grievance that the authorities of the police, including respondents 3 to 8, are not taking effective action on various petitions filed by them and particularly it is stated that Ext.P4 representation submitted before the 3rd respondent is kept pending without taking any action. On considering this writ petition for admission, this Court passed the following order on 1.7.2011. “We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. We are not persuaded to admit 2 W.P.(C).No.17831 of 2011 this writ petition now. We want the learned Govt. Pleader to take instructions from respondents 1 to 8 and appraise this Court of the real nature of the dispute. Needless to say if in the meantime there is any threat to the life or person of the petitioners, petitioners can complain to the eighth respondent who shall thereupon take such action as is necessary in accordance with law. We make it clear that we are not issuing any directions regarding protection of any property. The interim direction is only as regards the alleged threat to life and person of the petitioners unrelated to the dispute regarding property.” 2. Today Sri.M.P.Krishnan Nair, the counsel for the petitioners submitted that, the interim order directing protection for the lives of the petitioners, has not been obeyed by the police officers. According to him, after receipt of the copy of the interim order, the police officers were moved in vain. He submitted that the application filed by the petitioner for issuance of a commission, be allowed so that a report can be obtained as to what is the state of affairs prevailing in the property. According to him, respondents 9 and 10 and persons who are the office bearers of the local Jama-ath and others acting under them, have demolished the two tombs on the property wherein the mortal remains of two saints who 3 W.P.(C).No.17831 of 2011 were popularly known as 'Chomayil Uppappas', remains buried and excavation works are being done there even now with the blessings of the police. 3. On the basis of instructions received from the officials, the respondents, particularly the 8th respondent, it is submitted by learned Government Pleader that the 1st petitioner and her husband are notoriously known in the locality as 'വജ സദ ദമതകള '. They are propagating amongst the local public that the tombs on their property are sacred and that miraculous healing and other boons will be obtained if offerings are given at the tombs. Several people have been cheated and it is those people who approached the local Jama- ath, complaining of cheating by the 1st petitioner and her husband, and then only respondents 9 and 10, they being the official functionaries of the Jama-ath, intervened and ought police help for abating the continued cheating of illiterate public by the 1st petitioner and her husband and other members of their family. According to the learned Government Pleader, at the moment there is no threat for the 4 W.P.(C).No.17831 of 2011 lives or properties of the petitioners and adequate protection will be given for the lives of the petitioners by respondents 8 and 9, if found necessary. 4. Responding to the above submission, Mr.Krishnan Nair requested that the 5th respondent Superintendent of Police be directed to dispose of Ext.P4. 5. Having very anxiously considered the submissions addressed at the bar, we feel that the issue of the petitioners being permitted to preserve the two tombs situated in the petitioners' property as a place of public worship, should be left to be decided by a competent Civil court. We feel that several complicated questions are likely to arise before the civil court. Coming to the question of granting protection to the lives of the petitioners, we are not convinced that at present there is any imminent threat to the lives of the petitioners. This Court has already passed interim orders permitting the petitioners to approach the 8th respondent, when there is any real threat to their lives or persons and that on receiving such complaints, the 8th respondent shall take 5 W.P.(C).No.17831 of 2011 necessary action thereupon in accordance with law. We confirm the above interim direction issued in favour of the petitioners. As regards the disputes about the tombs on the property and the property itself, we relegate to the petitioners to approach a competent civil court. If the petitioners are desirous of facilitating the filing of a report by the Commissioner, petition in that regard can be submitted to the civil court. The petitioners have a further complaint that, even they are not being permitted to offer prayers at the tombs. As regards this complaint, we direct the 8th respondent to ensure that the petitioners, who are apparently title holders of the lands, on which tombs are constructed should not be prevented from offering prayers at the two tombs. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE ami/