IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2011 / 30TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1184 of 2011(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ABRAHAM MATHEW, AGED 42,S/O.MATHEW SIMON, T.C VI/480(3),NEAR TELEPHONE EXCHANGE, VATTIYOORKAVU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. SATHYAN,S/O.APPUKUTTAN, 'SOUPARNIKA',TC VI/1582,THOROTTUKONAM, PULAYANARKOTTA,CHERUVAKKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. VINOD KUMAR, S/O.KARUNAKARAN, T.C 28/2858,'CHITHRAS',VANCHIYOOR- THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VATTIYOORKAVU POLIC E STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY SECRETARY TO HOME,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R2 BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL JACOB JOSE R3 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.1184/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.3102/2010 DATED 20/10/2010. P2 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 17/12/2010 GIVEN BY PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 1184 of 2011-W ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioner has come to this Court seeking issue of directions under Art.226 of the Constitution to respondents 3 and 4 to afford police protection to the petitioner against the wanton, culpable and violent conduct on the part of respondents 1 and 2. 2. According to the petitioner, he had assigned his property in favour of a vendee under Ext.P1. That vendee is abroad. Respondents 1 and 2 had acted on behalf of the vendee. A document has been executed and the transaction is complete. According to the petitioner, respondents 1 and 2 claiming to be acting under the vendee, are threatening the petitioner and are compelling him under threat and duress to return the purchase W.P.(C) No. 1184 of 2011 -: 2 :- money and take back the property. The petitioner/vendor is unwilling to do the same. Respondents 1 and 2, it is alleged, are resorting to high handed wanton action to compel the petitioner to take back the property and return the amount. Complaint to the police did not evoke any response. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court with this petition. 3. The learned Government Pleader has entered appearance for respondents 3 and 4. Respondents 1 and 2 have been served. Only the 2nd respondent has chosen to appear before us. 4. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent denies all allegations and averments in the petition. According to the 2nd respondent, his role was very limited. He is known to the vendee who is now abroad. He had signed as a witness in the document. The vendee obviously is dissatisfied with the transaction. According to the vendee, he has been defrauded and cheated. The property regarding which the document has been executed is not the property for which the transaction was finalised. Respondent No.1 is a land broker and respondent No.2 is only a witness to the sale deed. The vendee has already filed a criminal complaint and the same has been registered as W.P.(C) No. 1184 of 2011 -: 3 :- Crime No.939/10 of Vattiyoorkavu Police Station, inter alia, under Secs.120B, 420, 468 and 471 IPC. According to the 2nd respondent, the petitioner is only praying by this petition for police protection to fetter the hands of the police and to deter them from taking proper action for investigation of the said Crime No.939/10. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent undertakes that the 2nd respondent has no intention and shall not indulge in any contumacious or culpable conduct against the petitioner. 5. The learned Government Pleader, after taking instructions, submits that Crime No.939/10 has been registered. In the perception of respondents 3 and 4 there is no threat to the person or life of the petitioner. If any genuine complaint is received of such threat to the person or life of the petitioner, necessary action shall be taken by respondents 3 and 4. The learned Government Pleader submits that the pendency of this writ petition or the orders passed in this writ petition will not in any way affect the proper investigation in Crime No.939/10. The same shall be investigated in accordance with law and appropriate action shall be taken, submits the learned Government Pleader. 6. Having considered all the relevant circumstances and W.P.(C) No. 1184 of 2011 -: 4 :- taking note of the undertaking given to this Court by the 2nd respondent who has entered appearance and the submissions of the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 3 and 4, we are satisfied that no specific further directions are necessary in this matter. We do not perceive any threat to the life or person of the petitioner as alleged by the petitioner. We accept the undertaking of the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 3 and 4 that in the unlikely event of any such threat being posed, police shall take necessary action in the matter. 7. This writ petition is, in these circumstances, allowed in part to the above extent. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge W.P.(C) No. 1184 of 2011 -: 5 :-