IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2011 / 30TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 19239 of 2011(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MUHAMMED HANEEFA, KAIYELIL HOUSE, CHERAVALLY P.O., KAYAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR SMT.A.SALINI LAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, S.P.OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-695001. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, C.I. OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM, PIN-690502. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM, PIN-690502. 4. YUSUFF KUNJU, SAINABHA MANZIL, CHERAVALLY P.O., KAYAMKULAM, PIN-690502. 5. SHAMMI, S/O.YUSUFF KUNJU, DO. DO. 6. RIYAZ, S/O.YUSUF KUNJU, DO. DO. BY GOVT.PLEADER T.K.VIPIN DAS ADDL.ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR R THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.19239/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS; EXT.P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 4/7/2011 /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ W.P(C).No. 19239 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking police protection for his life and also for his property from the respondents 4 to 6. 2. As directed by us, Sri. T.K.Vipindas learned Government Pleader has obtained instructions from the police regarding the correctness of the allegations in the writ petition and also regarding the action taken on Ext.P1 complaint submitted by the petitioner. The learned Government Pleader submits that the petitioner and the party respondents are closely related. The 4th respondent is the brother of the petitioner and the respondents 5 and 6 are children of the 4th respondent. The petitioner joined to a chitty conducted by Gokulam Chitty Company, to which for getting prize money the party respondents stood as sureties. Now, the complaint of the party respondents is that the petitioner is not remitting the amount due to the chitty company, as a result of which, the property belonging to the party respondents offered as security stands the WPC.No.19239/2011 2 risk of being proceeded against by the chitty company. The foreman of the chitty company was actually initiated recovery proceedings also. According to the learned Government Pleader, on receiving Ext.P1, the parties were summoned to the police station and respondents were directed not to take law into their hands and to pursue legal remedies for redressing their grievance that the petitioner is not paying back the chitty amount. According to the Government Pleader, at the moment there is no threat on the life or the property of the petitioner or any members of the petitioner's family. Under the above circumstances, we dispose of the writ petition declining the specific prayer in the writ petition, however, directing the 3rd respondent to keep close vigil over the petitioner and respondents 4 to 6 and to ensure that no law and order situation arises on account of the disputes between them and that lives of the petitioner as well as respondents 4 to 6 are secured. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE dpk