IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2011 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 6382 of 2011(W) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ DEVAKI, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.LATE P.V.NARAYANAN, PUTHUKKATTIL HOUSE, PONNAMVAYAL, PADIYOTICHAL P.O., KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.S.SACHITHANANDA PAI RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- 1. THE S P OF POLICE, KANNUR - 670 001. 2. THE S I OF POLICE, PERINGOM POLICE STATION, KANNUR - 670 001. 3. SHIJU, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.GOPI, THYPARAMBIL HOUSE, PONNAMVAYAL P.O., KANNUR - 670 001. 4. GOVINDAN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.KURUVADAN, EDINJAMALA, PADIYOTICHAL P.O., POTRADI, KANNUR - 670 001. 5. RAJEEVAN, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, POTHERA VEETIL, POTRADI, PADIYOTICHAL P.O.,KANNUR - 670 001. 6. AJI, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN, OTTEN VEETTIL, POTRADI, PADITYOTICHAL P.O.,KANNUR - 670 001. 7. ANISH, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.GOVINDAN, OTTEN VEETTIL, POTRADI, PADIYOTICHAL P.O.,KANNUR - 670 001. 8. SUKUMARAN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.KUNJAMBU, PUTHIYARAMBAN VEETTIL, POTRADI, PADIYOTICHAL P.O., KANNUR - 670 001. 9. RAJAN K.O.V., AGED 46 YEARS, KANJIRAPPUZHA OTTEN VEETTIL, POTRADI, PADIYOTICHAL P.O., KANNUR - 670 001. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JAIBY PAUL R3 TO R7 & R9 BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN, SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.6382/2011 W APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 07/01/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. P2: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 16/02/11 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.6382 of 2011-W ***************************** Dated this the 17th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. Petitioner, a woman, has come to this Court with this petition claiming issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 1 and 2 police officials to afford protection to her life and property against contumacious, culpable and violent acts apprehended from respondents 3 to 9. 2. According to the petitioner, she is the owner of 1.5 acres of land which is situated at a distance of about 1 k.m from her residence. On the eastern side of the property, there is a pathway. There is a dispute regarding the said pathway. According to the petitioner, respondents 3 to 9 have attempted to widen a pathway and had cut and removed rubber trees in the property. About that dispute, a civil suit has already been filed and interim orders have been passed by the civil court. According to the petitioner, the dispute now is not about the matter covered by the civil dispute, but she is being illegally obstructed from entering her property and doing tapping work in the property. When the petitioner attempts to do that, there is a threat to her life also, it is submitted. There is no dispute W.P(C) No.6382 of 2011-W 2 regarding that part of the property between the parties, submits counsel. 3. All respondents have been served. All respondents except the 8th respondent have entered appearance. The learned counsel for party respondents contends that the allegations raised are totally false and incorrect. There is a serious dispute about the width of the pathway and the civil court is already seized off the matter. The petitioner is attempting to steal a march over the party respondents so as to help her in the suit pending before the civil court. Respondents have never obstructed entry of the petitioner into her property or the tapping operation there. No threat has been caused to the life of the petitioner. This petition is totally unnecessary. Submissions/undertaking of the party respondents may be recorded and this proceedings may be closed holding that no directions under Article 226 are necessary, submits the learned counsel for party respondents. 4. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions from respondents 1 and 2 submits that in the perception of respondents 1 and 2, there is no threat to the life or property of the petitioner. It is true that there is a civil dispute about the pathway and the bone of contention is the W.P(C) No.6382 of 2011-W 3 actual width of the pathway. The petitioner has no obstruction against carrying on tapping operation in her property. There is no threat to her life, if there be any, respondents 1 and 2 shall take proper action, undertakes the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. 5. We take note of the submission of respondents 3 to 9 and we take note of the submission of the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. We are satisfied that those submissions/undertaking can be accepted and proceedings in this Writ Petition can be closed. We are satisfied that no further specific directions need be issued in this Writ Petition now. 6. This Writ Petition is accordingly allowed in part to the above extent. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/