IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2008 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 36904 of 2008(R) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- C.JOHNSON, JITHALAYAM, KALAYIL, OTTASHEKHARAMANGALAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI SRI.S.S.HUSSAIN SRI.P.K.NIJOY RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VELLARADA. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARYANKODE. 4. NAGAPPAN, S/O.JOSEPH NADAR, KIZHEKALAYIL, CHEMBOOR, OTTASHEKHARAMANGALAM P.O., KEEZHAROOR VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. DAISY, D/O.JOSEPH NADAR, KIZHEKALAYIL, CHEMBOOR, OTTASHEKHARAMANGALAM P.O., KEEZHAROOR VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. STANLEY, S/O.DASAYYAN NADAR, KALAYIL CHANAPILAMANNADI, THALANIRA PUTHENVEEDU, EDAVAL DESOM, KEEZHAROOR, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(C)NO. 36904 OF 2008 ============================ DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2008 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair,J. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief: “I) issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, direction or order compelling the respondents 2 and 3 to give adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner and members of the family.” 2. The prayers in the petitions filed by the petitioner before the police are entirely different from the above quoted prayer. Ext.P1 representation filed by the petitioner before the Sub Inspector of Police would show that respondents 4 and 5 herein have encroached into his property and when the petitioner attempted to construct compound wall for his property that was obstructed by the said respondents and he was threatened also. WPC.36904/2008 -2- So, in Ext.P1 he requested the police officer to look into the said grievance and take appropriate action in accordance with law. It was followed by Ext.P2 representation before the Circle Inspector of Police. The prayer therein is also to grant protection for constructing a compound wall for his property. Going by Exts.P1 and P2, it is evident that there is a boundary dispute between the petitioner and respondents 4 to 6. The petitioner would like to construct a compound wall, but because of the boundary dispute the party respondents are opposing it. In the above context, the petitioner has come to this Court praying for police protection to his life so that with that protection, he can achieve the desired object of constructing the compound wall. 3. We feel that this Court is not justified in issuing any direction to the police in view of the aforementioned civil dispute concerning boundary and the main prayer raised by the petitioner before the police is for their assistance to construct a compound wall. If the police failed to do the same, this Court cannot issue any direction in view of the decisions of this Court in Devadasan v. State of Kerala [2005(3)K.L.T..739) and WPC.36904/2008 -3- Ajayakumar v. State of Kerala [2008(1)K.L.T.901]. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner and his right to move other forums for appropriate reliefs. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE M.C. HARI RANI, JUDGE ks.