IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2011 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 14189 of 2011(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SHIBU KUMAR, S/O.MOOVARNATHALAVEETIL VELAYUDHAN, FLAT NO.2C, KALOOR RESIDENCY, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM. BY SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADVS. SMT.M.M.DEEPA, SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL). RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM RANGE – 682 011. 2. THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM – 682 011. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM – 682 018. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM – 682 031. 5. SURESH KUMAR @ SREE KUMAR, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, KALYANI HOUSE, BOSE NAGAR, ELAMKULAM, KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM- 682 020. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. C.M. CHARISMA, R5 BY ADVS. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN, SRI.NIREESH MATHEW. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.14189/2011-W: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBIT: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 13/05/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.1. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.14189 of 2011-W ***************************** Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court claiming issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 1 to 4 to afford police protection for the petitioner against illegal, contumacious and culpable acts on the part of the 5th respondent. 2. The petitioner was earlier working under the 5th respondent. Now, the petitioner has separated and has set up his own business. Both are now engaged in the business of running beauty parlours for men and women. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 5th respondent, unable to accept the separation and setting up of a separate identical business by the petitioner - his former employee, is indulging in contumacious and culpable acts threatening his life and person. It is, in these circumstances, prayed that adequate police protection may be afforded to the petitioner. W.P(C) No.14189 of 2011-W 2 3. The 5th respondent has entered appearance. The learned counsel for the 5th respondent submits that the 5th respondent categorically undertakes before this Court that he shall not indulge in any such activities. According to the 5th respondent this petition is filed mischievously without any bona fides at all on account of business rivalry. Any appropriate direction may be issued. The 5th respondent does not stand against any such direction as the 5th respondent has absolutely no intention to indulge in any culpable acts against the petitioner. 3. The learned Government Pleader only submits that appropriate directions may be issued. 4. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, we are satisfied that the undertaking of the 5th respondent can be accepted and appropriate further directions can be issued. 5. In the result: a) This Writ Petition is allowed in part; b) If there be any complaint of culpable and contumacious acts on the part of the 5th respondent against the petitioner, the petitioner shall be at liberty to lodge a complaint W.P(C) No.14189 of 2011-W 3 before respondents 1 to 4, who shall thereupon take appropriate action in accordance with law to afford protection to the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/