IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2010 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 32669 of 2010(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. G.GUNASEKHAR, PROPRIETOR, SRI SARASWATHI BUS SERVICES, 21-B, TIRUPPUR ROAD, MERCHANT ASSOCIATION BUILDING, UDUMALPET P.O., TAMILNADU-642 126. 2. P.A.JOY, PALAKKALPARAMBIL HOUSE, MARAYOOR P.O., IDUKKI, KERALA-685 620. BY ADV. SRI.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.M.CHANDRA BOSE SRI.N.SREEKUMAR (ELAMAKKARA) SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, VELLAYAMBALAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KUYILIMALA, IDUKKI-685620. 4. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI-685603. 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARAYOOR, IDUKKI-685 620. 6. BALU, S/O. KANTHAN, MASHIVAYAL, MARAYOOR P.O., IDUKKI-685 620. WPC NO.32669/2010 -2- 7. MARICHAMY @ MAHESH, S/O. KASHIPPANDI, PALLANADU, MARAYOOR P.O., IDUKKI-685 620. 8. TAMIL KUMAR, S/O. SELVARAJ, PAMBANMALA, THALAYAR P.O., IDUKKI. 9. RAJU, S/O. KANTHAN, MASHIVAYAL, MARAYOOR P.O., IDUKKI-685 620. 10. BALAMURUGAN, S/O. PERUMAL, CHERUVAD, MAIKALGIRI P.O., IDUKKI-685 620. 11. SHATHEESH @ KUTTAPPAN, S/O. SELVARAJ, PAMBANMALA, THALAYAR P.O., IDUKKI. 12. LEKSHMANAN, S/O. SELVARAJ, PAMBANMALA, THALAYAR P.O., IDUKKI. 13. ANNADURAI, S/O. CHUDALAI, PATTIKKADU, MARAYOOR P.O., IDUKKI-685 620. 14. VINOD, S/O. SEKHAR, MELADI, MARAYOOR P.O., IDUKKI-685 620. 15. KASPAR, S/O. ANTHONY, COFFEE STORE, THALAYAR P.O., IDUKKI. 16. MOHANAN, S/O. MURUGAN, KOVILKADAVU, SAHAYAGIRI P.O., IDUKKI-685 620. R1 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. R6 BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.RAHUL VENUGOPAL SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.32669 OF 2010: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.235/2010 OF MARAYOOR POLICE STATION DATED 4.7.2010. EXT.P2.TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.238/2010 OF MARAYOOR POLICE STATION DATED 7.7.2010. EXT.P3.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 18.5.2010. EXT.P4.TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.5.2010. EXT.P5.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 31.3.2010 GIVEN TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P6.TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 25.6.2010. EXT.P7.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 3.5.2010 GIVEN TO THE CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA. EXT.P8.TRUE COPIES OF THE NEWS PAPER REPORTS. K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.32669 of 2010-G ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 9th day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioners have approached this Court seeking the following relief: “to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing respondents 2 to 5 to give adequate and effective police protection to the life of the petitioners their staff and for plying their buses bearing Nos.TN 41 V 999 and TN 41 W 999 against the illegal acts of respondents 6 to 16 and their men.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioners is as follows: The Ist petitioner is a resident of Tamilnadu and the proprietor of an inter-state private bus service. The 2nd petitioner is supervising the service in Kerala. The allegation is about respondents 6 to 16. They are stated to be gangsters and criminals. It is alleged that for the last one year respondents 6 to 16 and their men have attacked the petitioners and their staff in the above buses. It is stated that about 30 criminal cases are WPC 32669/2010 -2- pending against them in the police station and forest office. Petitioner has produced Exts.P1 and P2 FIR in two crimes. There is allegation that respondents 6 to 16 and their men stopped the private bus and attacked the conductor on 4.4.2010. Eliciting no response, petitioners are before us. 3. A counter affidavit is filed by respondent No.6. It is inter alia stated in the counter affidavit as under: “6. There is no reason for the petitioners to live under fear on account of any conduct by this respondent. He has never threatened to any one of the petitioners in any manner. The allegations of threat of putting bomb in their bus etc. as stated above are totally false. There are no proceedings taken against him under the KAAPA. There has been no inaction on the part of the police officers. The Dy.S.P. had called this respondent to his office where he had explained his innocence. He was called to the office of the Dy.S.P. to be present on 8.7.2010 and a statement has been recorded by him. This shows that the Dy.S.P has taken prompt action in the matter and there was no inaction as alleged. 8. The petitioners have deliberately suppressed the information that this respondent was acting as the Manager of the first petitioner in running his bus services and there was difference of opinion and about that this respondent has submitted a complaint before the office bearers of the CITU Marayoor. The matter is being WPC 32669/2010 -3- negotiated and settled by that body. Since the matter is under negotiations, to get an upper hand in this, this Hon'ble court's intervention is sought. Suppressing the same, the petitioners have come to this Hon'ble Court with unclean hands. The first petitioner owes substantial amounts to this respondent. It is to avoid that the present petition has been filed........” 4. We heard Sri.K.Ramakumar, the learned senior counsel for the 6th respondent and also the learned Government Pleader. We have already passed an interim order. The learned senior counsel for the 6th respondent would reiterate what is stated in paragraphs 6 and 8 of the counter affidavit and he would submit that the 6th respondent has no intention in any way to threaten the petitioners or to obstruct the running of the bus service of the Ist petitioner as alleged. We record the same and we further direct that if the petitioners complain of any obstruction or threat by respondents 6 to 16 before the 5th respondent, the 5th respondent shall look into it and if the threat is found to be genuine, he shall provide protection to the life of the petitioners, their staff and for plying the buses bearing No.TN 41 V 999 and TN 41 W 999 as against respondents 6 to 16. WPC 32669/2010 -4- We make it clear that we have not pronounced on the issue relating to the monetary dispute as projected by the 6th respondent and if the matter reaches any forum in relation to the same the said forum shall be free to decide the matter untrammelled by anything contained in this judgment. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE. MS