IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 30TH MAY 2011 / 9TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 9923 of 2011(M) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- AJITH KUMAR, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.BHASKARAPANICKER, AJITH VIHAR (PULLUVALLIL HOUSE), NETTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN- 682 046. BY ADV. SRI.VIJAI MATHEWS SRI.BINU PAUL (NETTOOR) RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM.682 015 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANANAGAD POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM.PIN- 682 506 3. VIJAY KUMAR.C., DEVAYANAM, THAMARAKULAM ROAD, CHAKKALAKUTH, NILAMBOOR P.O., MALAPPURAM.PIN-679 329 4. CHANDRAN, KARAKKUNNATH, NILAMBOOR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN- 679 329. 5. RAMACHANDRAN.P., KALLINGALTHODU HOUSE, VIRADOORHILL, NILAMBOOR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.PIN-679 329 6. SUKUMARAN.P., SREENILAYAM, CHAKKALAKUTH, NILAMBOOR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.PIN-679 329 7. E.NARAYANAN NAIR, 48/C, USMAN ALI NAGAR, AMBALAYAM, STREET EXTENTION, K.K.NAGAR, TRICHY-21. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts 2/- -2- WP(C)NO.9923/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CC NO.1127/2010 DATED 4/11/2010. P2 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 22/3/2011 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.9923 of 2011-M ***************************** Dated this the 30th day of May, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court seeking issue of directions to respondents 1 and 2 to afford police protection to the petitioner against contumacious and culpable acts that are apprehended from respondents 3 to 6. 2. According to the petitioner, he works as an L.I.C agent. The 7th respondent was associated with him and the 7th respondent has persuaded the petitioner as also respondents 3 to 6 to invest money. Respondents 3 to 6 are now demanding return of money. Since they are not able to get their money from the 7th respondent, they have turned against the petitioner and are threatening his life and property in an attempt to enforce their claim for return of money. According to the petitioner, he is not liable to return the amount to respondents 3 to 6. Protection may be afforded to the petitioner against respondents 3 to 6, it is prayed. W.P(C) No.9923 of 2011-M 2 3. The 7th respondent has not chosen to appear. Respondents 3 to 6 have entered appearance through a counsel. According to the learned counsel for respondents 3 to 6, it was a joint business of the petitioner and the 7th respondent. Respondents 3 to 6 were induced to invest amounts. The amounts have not been returned. Cheques etc. have been issued. They have been dishonoured. Respondents 3 to 6 intend to take action against the petitioner and the 7th respondent. They have no intention whatsoever to take law into their hands and to indulge in any contumacious or culpable conduct against the petitioner or the 7th respondent. In these circumstances, there is no necessity whatsoever to arm the petitioner with an order of police protection. Appropriate safeguards may be taken and the prayer made in the petition may be dismissed. The undertaking of respondents 3 to 6 that they shall not indulge in any illegal conduct against the petitioner may be recorded and the proceedings may be closed, it is prayed. 4. Interim order was issued on 08.04.2011 that the petitioner shall be at liberty to complain to the 2nd respondent if W.P(C) No.9923 of 2011-M 3 there be any threat to his life or person. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions from respondents 1 and 2 submits that no such complaint whatsoever has been received. In the perception of the police officials also, there is no threat to the life of the petitioner. There are claims by respondents 3 to 6 for return of amounts. There is no threat whatsoever to the life of the petitioner. 5. We are satisfied, in these circumstances, that the undertaking of respondents 3 to 6 and the submissions of the learned Government Pleader can be accepted. This petition can in these circumstances be dismissed with appropriate directions. 6. In the result: a) This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed; b) We accept the submission of the learned counsel for respondents 3 to 6 that they shall not indulge in any contumacious or culpable act against the petitioner to enforce monetary claims; c) We accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader that if there be any complaint against any threat to the W.P(C) No.9923 of 2011-M 4 threat to the life and person of the petitioner from respondents 3 to 6, the petitioner shall be at liberty to complain to the 2nd respondent, whereupon necessary action in accordance with law shall be taken by the 2nd respondent. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/