IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2010 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 8073 of 2010(H) ------------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- YOOSAF, S/O.HAMEED RAWTHER, AGED 54 , MUTHUPALACKAL VEEDU, VALANKARA MURI, PURAMUTTOM. BY ADV. SRI.V.ANIL (K/1480/98) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, (LAW & ORDER) POLICE HEADQUARTERS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA, 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA, 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOYIPURAM POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA. 5. ISMAIL.S/O.SAYED MOHAMMED, VATTUKUTTIYIL VEEDU, NARAKATHANI, EZHUMATTUR VILLAGE,MALLAPPALLY. 6. BALAKRISHNAN, MUTHUPALAKKAL VEEDU, VALANKARA MURI, PURAMATTOM VILLAGE. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI T.K. VIPINDAS. ADV. SRI.ESM.KABEER FOR R5 & R6. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).NO.8073 OF 2010 H PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 PHOTOCOPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.144 OF 2010 OF KOYIPURM POLICE STATION. EXT.P2 PHOTOCOPY OF THE FIS IN CRIME NO.144 OF 2010 OF KOYIPURAM POLIE STATION. EXT.P3 PHOTOCOPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 26.02.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // PS to Judge K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P(C). NO. 8073 OF 2010 H --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th May, 2010 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. The prayer in the Writ Petition is as follows: “Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 to 4 to render adequate and necessary police protection to the life and property of the petitioner and his family from the threat of respondents 5 & 6 and their henchmen.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is doing timber business. Fifth respondent is a relative of the petitioner. The fifth respondent and the petitioner had made some wordy quarrel. Allegation is made in respect4 of an accident which took place on 22.2.2010. Exts.P1 and P2 are the FIR and FI Statement. It is stated that there was threat on 25.02.2010. Petitioner filed Ext.P3 representation. 3. Counter Affidavit is filed by respondents 5 and 6, WPC.8073/2010 H 2 wherein, it is, inter alia, stated that the petitioner attacked the fifth respondent. It is stated further that the petitioner doubts that the fifth respondent is behind the property dispute. There are other cases also, it is stated, against the petitioner. A Reply Affidavit is filed producing also Ext.P4 photographs. 4. We heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties including the learned Government Pleader. Learned counsel for the party respondents submits that the party respondents have not attacked the petitioner and they have no intention to attack the petitioner. It is also submitted that under the guise of the order of police protection for the life of the petitioner, it is apprehended that attempts will be made to assert his right in respect of the property. Learned Government Pleader submits that crimes are registered against the party respondents. 5. The Writ Petition is disposed of recording the submission of the learned counsel for respondents 5 and 6. We further direct that in case any threat by respondents 5 and 6, respondents 1 to 4 shall provide adequate protection to the life WPC.8073/2010 H 3 of the petitioner and his family members consisting of his wife and children. We make it further clear that we have not pronounced on the property rights of the parties and that is a matter to be worked out in the appropriate Forums. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge