IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH OCTOBER 2007 / 18TH ASWINA 1929 WP(C).No. 24325 of 2007(U) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ RAJAN A.MATHEWS, S/O. DAVIES, AGED 58, OUSEPH PARAMBIL, KARSHAKA ROAD, VADUTHALA P.O., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.BENHUR JOSEPH MANAYANI RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. M.A.PHARIS, CHAIRMAN, RASTRA DEEPIKA, REGD. OFFICE, DEEPIKA BUILDINGS, P.B.NO.7, COLLEGE ROAD, KOTTAYAM - 1. 2. REC. FR.ROBIN MATHEW, MANAGING DIRECTOR, -DO-. 3. MAR MATHEW ARACKAL, BISHOP OF KANJIRAPPALLY DIOCESE, BISHOP'S HOUSE, KANJIRAPPALLY. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM. 5. DY. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, O/O. DY. S.P., KOTTAYAM. 6. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHANGANASSERY. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.A.SALIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/10/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO: 24325/2007 U JUDGEMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. 10/10/2007. SD/- K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. SD/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. True copy tga K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.24325 of 2007-U ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 10th day of August, 2007 ORDER Balakrishnan Nair, J. Admit. Issue notice. 2. The petitioner claims that he is the convener of Deepika Cherukida Ohari Udama Samrakshana Samithi. A meeting of the small scale shareholders of the Rashtra Deepika Ltd. is proposed to be held at 2.30. p.m. on 11.8.2007. The petitioner apprehends that the meeting may be disrupted by the supporters of the majority shareholders. So he seeks police protection. He claims that he has preferred Ext.P2 representation before respondents 4 to 6. 3. Learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that those representations were not received by the respondents. Petitioner submits that he has sent the representation today through fax to the 5th respondent. 4. Prima facie it would appear that the petitioner has approached this court without moving the police first. Therefore, the writ petition should have been dismissed. But the petitioner, like any other citizen, even if he has not approached this court, is entitled to get protection for his life. If any obstruction is caused to the holding of the meeting, the petitioner shall alert the 6th respondent and the said respondent will look into the complaint of the petitioner and take appropriate action in accordance with law. The WPC No.24325/2007 2 said respondent shall ensure that law and order is maintained and breach of peace is averted. . K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR JUDGE HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE. Hand over copy of this order to both sides today itself. mt/