IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2011 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 14299 of 2011(J) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- LAL K.P.,AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.PUSHKARAN, ANITHA BHAVAN, CHULLIMANOOR ANADU VILLAGE, PROPRIETOR, KERALA BAMBOO HOUSE KURAYANNI, VARKALA BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. PAVITHRAN, S/O.KUNJUKRISHNAN, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, SUGATHA NIVAS, KURAYKANNI, VARKALA P.O.PIN-695 141 2. UDYAKUMAR, S/O.KUNJUKRISHNAN, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, SUGATHA NIVAS,KURAYKANNI VARKALA P.O.PIN-695 141 3. SAJU,S/O.KUNJUKRISHNAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, SUGATHA NIVAS,KURAYKANNI VARKALA P.O.PIN-695 141 4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VARKALA.P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695 141 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,VARKALA.P.O., TRIVANDRUM-PIN-695 141 R4 & R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts 2/- -2- WP(C)NO.14299/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 DATED 1/9/2008. P2 COPY OF THE LICENCE FEE RECEIPT DATED 3/1/2011 SHOWING THAT THE PETITIONER IS CONDUCTING THE RESORT. P3 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,VARKALA DATED 23/5/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.14299 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd June, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court seeking issue of directions to respondents 4 and 5 under Article 226 of the Constitution to afford police protection to the petitioner against respondents 1 to 3 who are allegedly threatening the life and person of the petitioner. 2. According to the petitioner, he had obtained a property under Ext.P1 deed from respondents 1 to 3. He was permitted to run a resort in that property till 30.5.2011. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has already vacated the premises now. There were some disputes between the petitioner on the one hand and respondents 1 to 3 on the other about removal of structures erected in the property of the petitioner. Parties are already before the civil court and it is submitted that interim directions have been issued by the civil court. At any rate, the petitioner does WPC No.14299 of 2011 2 not now want to claim any order of protection in respect of the property. 3. The short grievance of the petitioner is that because of such disputes between the petitioner and respondents 1 to 3, respondents 1 to 3 are now attempting to attack and physically debilitate the petitioner. It is hence that the petitioner seeks an order directing respondents 4 and 5 to afford protection to the life and person of the petitioner. 4. Respondents 1 to 3 though served have not chosen to enter appearance. For respondents 4 and 5, the learned Government Pleader appears. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions submits that the police shall afford protection to the life and person of the petitioner. We are satisfied, in the absence of any opposition from respondents 1 to 3 and in the light of the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 4 and 5, that the prayer of the petitioner can be allowed and protection can be ordered. 5. In the result, a) This petition is allowed. WPC No.14299 of 2011 3 b) Respondents 4 and 5 are directed to afford police protection to the petitioner for his life and person against any illegal, contumacious or culpable acts that may be committed by respondents 1 to 3. sd/- R.BASANT JUDGE sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/ true copy P.S.TO JUDGE