IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 7273 of 2010(H) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- SURESH KUMAR G. S/O.GOPINATHAN, LICENCEE T.S.NO.10/2009-10, THEVARTHOTTAM, GROUP NO.11, ANCHAL EXCISE RANGE RESIDING AT CHANDRIKA VILASOM, KARIYARA EAST, VILAKUDY VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANCHAL, KOLLAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANCHAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. 4. SRI.SABARI, DALIYA MANZIL, MALAMEL, ARAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 5. SRI.GOPAN, GIRIJA MANDIRATHIL, MALAMEL, ARAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 6. SMT.MARIAMMA, ANAKOTTUVILA, MALAMEL, ARAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 7. SMT.SHAJITHA,KANNIMEL VEETTIL, MALAMEL, ARAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI T.K. VIPINDAS. ADV. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR FOR R4-5 SRI.JAYAKRISHNAN.C.H FOR R4-5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.7273 OF 2010 H PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENCE OF THE TODDY SHOP NO.10/2009-10 OF ANCHAL EXCISE RANGE FOR THE ABKARI YEAR 2009-10 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, KOLLAM. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND FIS IN CRIME NO.207/2010 OF ANCHAL POLICE STATION. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 28.02.2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY MR. RAJENDRAN AND SMT. USHA BEFORE TO SECRETARY TO EDAMULAKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT. // True Copy // PS to Judge K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P(C). NO. 7273 OF 2010 H --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st March, 2010 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. Petitioner prays for police protection to run a toddy shop as against the obstruction by respondents 4 to 7 and their henchmen. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the party respondents raised two objections: Firstly, he would submit that the petitioner does not possess a licence under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. In this connection, he relied on a Bench decision of this Court in Bosco Antony v. State of Kerala (2007 (4) KLT 526). Clearly, he submits that there is a temple within the prohibited distance. Learned Government Pleader got instructions in the matter. He would submit that the temple is situated beyond the prohibited distance. Learned counsel for the petitioner, when confronted with the Bench decision, would submit that the petitioner may be granted WPC.7273/2010 H 2 protection upon getting licence from the Panchayat. Learned counsel for the party respondents would point out another development in the form of the application filed by the petitioner for licence from the Panchayat being rejected. We take note of the submissions and also the law laid down by the Bench decision and dispose of the Writ Petition as follows: If the petitioner obtains licence from the concerned Panchayat for running toddy shop and if there is obstruction by respondents 4 to 7, there will be a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to afford adequate police protection as against any such obstruction. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge