IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS FRIDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2010 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9247 of 2010(E) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- ABDUL JABBAR, S/O.IBRAHIM HAJI, ERACHAM VEETTIL, VENGITANGU VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY HOME SECRETARY, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PAVARATTY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. FRANCIS, S/O.LAZAR, KURUTTUKULANGARA, VENGITANGU VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. 5. LAISON, S/O.FRANCIS, KURUTTUKULANGARA, VENGITANGU VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SUKUMARAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.9247 of 2010-E ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 9th day of April, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief:-- “to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 3rd respondent to take action upon Exhibits.P1, P4 and P5 complaints and provide adequate protection to the life of the petitioner.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:-- Petitioner's brother-in-law is the owner of land in Sy.No.42/11 of Vengitangu Village. Half the share was given to his daughter. All of them are in Dubai and petitioner was entrusted to manage the property. It is stated that respondents 4 and 5 and their henchmen are attempting to destroy the boundary wall. Petitioner filed Ext.P1 complaint before the 3rd respondent. He has also filed Ext.P2 suit before the Munsiff Court, Chavakkad and the learned Munisff granted Ext.P3 injunction order. It is stated that respondents 4 and 5 WPC 9247/2010 -2- trespassed into the property and destroyed the pillars. There is allegation of threat. Petitioner filed Ext.P4 complaint. After perusing the writ petition and after hearing the learned counsel, we are of the view that petitioner should be relegated to pursue his remedies before the Civil Court. However, we direct that in case the petitioner complains about the commission of any cognizable offence, action shall be taken in accordance with law. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS