IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH JULY 2008 / 19TH ASHADHA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1001 of 2008(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.10838/2008 Dated 09/04/2008 .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WP(C): ----------------------------------------------------- K.M.ABDUL KALAM, S/O.K.K.MOHAMMED MOIDEEN, AGED 45 YEARS, KAKKAD (H), C.P.UMMER ROAD, PULLEPPADY, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-35. BY ADV. SMT.C.G.BINDU SMT.C.G.AJITHA RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS IN THE WP(C): ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. NAWAZ, AGED AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM. 2. G.VENU, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE STATION. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K. MEERA THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss J.B. KOSHY & P.N. RAVINDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- C.O.C.NO.1001 OF 2008-S ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of July, 2008. JUDGMENT Koshy, J: The petitioner approached this Court for police protection. The Court did not grant police protection. The operative portion of the judgment reads as follows: “Having regard to the facts of the case, we feel that the police cannot be asked to meddle in this dispute in favour of one party or the other. They have no power to render assistance to the party, which according to them, has a better title. It is the function of the Civil Court. The petitioner can move the civil court and try to get appropriate interim orders against those causing obstruction to the construction. If the interim orders granted are violated, he can get further directions from the Civil Court to the police to enforce the orders of that court. In this jurisdiction we are concerned with the failure of duty of the police in discharging its functions. Having regard to the nature of the dispute, the best thing the police can do is to keep their hands off from the dispute. In view of the above position, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contention of the petitioner and his right to approach other forums. But, this will not affect the powers of the police to register and investigate a crime, if any cognizable offence is reported.” Now the contention is that even though the complaint is filed, COC.1001/08 . 2 the police is not registering any case. The petitioner can avail the remedy available under the Cr.P.C and make complaints to the higher authorities and if that is also not successful, he can approach the Magistrate concerned by filing a private complaint. The duty of the police is to maintain law and order situation. It cannot be said that there is wilfull contempt of the judgment of this Court as the judgment is only a general order without granting police protection. Without prejudice to the other remedies, this contempt of court case is closed. J.B. KOSHY, JUDGE. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. cl COC.1001/08 . 3