IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL TUESDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29617 of 2011(B) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------- SHIBURAJ.T, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.GANGADHARAN, THEKKINKATTIL, VELLILA P.O., MANKADA, MALAPPURAM NOW RESIDING AT KALATHIL HOUSE, EZHAKKAD P.O., MUNDOOR, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, MALAPPURAM-690 104. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PALAKKAD-678 001. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KONGAD POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT- 678 004. 4. SREENIVASAN, AREEKATTUPARAMBIL, RAMAPURAM P.O., PANAGAMGARA, MALAPPURAM-690 109. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 29617 of 2011(B) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 19/10/11 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DT.23/10/11 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.29617 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking protection for his life and limbs from alleged illegalities and contumacious acts from the part of the 4th respondent. According to him, one John Peter who was his acquaintant was doing some business in partnership with the 4th respondent. The business of that partnership was procuring oversees jobs for people and in connection with that business the above firm received passports and other documents pertaining to many people. Sri.John Peter has suddenly absconded and the customers of that business have started pestering the 4th respondent. In retaliation, the 4th respondent is threatening the petitioner. W. P. C. No.29617 of 2011 -2- 2. The facts narrated by the petitioner appear to be strange. However, since we are told that Ext.P2 petition submitted by the petitioner is pending before the Superintendent of Police and that there is subsisting threat to the life and limbs of the petitioner, we are of the view that limited relief can be given to the petitioner in the following terms even without notice to the 4th respondent. 3. The 2nd respondent is directed to take up Ext.P2 representation immediately and to conduct an enquiry into the same either by himself or through any subordinate officer in whom he is having confidence. As part of the enquiry, it is open to the officer conducting enquiry to summon the 4th respondent also. If the enquiry reveals that there is truth in the allegation that there is subsisting threat to the life and limbs of the petitioner from the 4th respondents then it will be the obligation of respondents 2 W. P. C. No.29617 of 2011 -3- and 3 to ensure that the life and limbs of the petitioner are safe. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE K. HARILAL JUDGE kns/-