IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2011 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13213 of 2011(B) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- BABU HARIHARAN, S/O NANAPPAN, AGED 63 YEARS, OLIPPILAKATT HOUSE, NANGELIPADY, NELLIKUZHY, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM RURAL, ALUVA-683101. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686691. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM-686691. 5. N.RAJENDRAN, AGED 56, S/O NANAPPAN, OLIPPILAKATT HOUSE, E.M.S.NAGAR, MADAVOOR P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686669. 6. N.DINESH, S/O NANAPPAN, OLIPPILAKATT, MATHIRAPALLY, M.A.COLLEGE P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686691. 7. SUNIL KUMAR, S/O KUMARAN, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OLIPPILAKATT HOUSE, AVOLI P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686667. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA R5 RO R7 BY ADVS. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR), SRI.N.RAJESH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) 13213/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE INFORMATION DTD. 11.2.2010 OBTAINED BY THE PETITONER FROM SRO KOTHAMANGALAM. P2:- COPY OF THE INJUNCTION ORDER DTD. 17.1.2011 IN OS. NO.23/2011 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA. P3:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 10.8.2010 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 17.10.2010 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 8.4.2011 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P6:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 8.4.2011 OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(c) No.13213 of 2011-B ***************************** Dated this the 7th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court seeking issue of directions to respondents 2 to 4 - police officials under the 1st respondent State, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to afford protection for the life and person of the petitioner against illegal, culpable and violent conduct on the part of respondents 5 to 7. Respondents 5 and 6 are none other than the younger brothers of the petitioner. The 7th respondent is allegedly an employee of respondents 5 and 6 and a distant relative of the petitioner. 2. There admittedly are civil disputes and litigation between the petitioner on the one hand and his brothers on the other. It is the case of the petitioner that the 7th respondent, an employee of the 6th respondent, had pelted stones at the house of the petitioner. He lodged a complaint, but no action was taken by the police. The petitioner apprehends that respondents 5 to 7 may indulge in such contumacious, culpable and violent acts in future. Hence protection is claimed for the life and person of the petitioner. W.P(c) No.13213 of 2011-B 2 3. Respondents 5 to 7 have entered appearance through a counsel. They stoutly deny the allegation that there was any such contumacious or culpable conduct on their part. They have no intention to pose any threat or harm to the life and person of the petitioner, it is undertaken categorically. 4. The petitioner has a further grievance that he is not being permitted to visit his mother, who is residing along with the 6th respondent. The learned counsel for the 6th respondent submits that the 6th respondent has absolutely no objection in the petitioner visiting his mother at his house. 5. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions submits that there are bitter disputes between the parties. The brothers have been called to the police station. They have agreed not to indulge in any contumacious or culpable acts against the other. The 6th respondent had offered that the petitioner can visit his mother at his house without any obstruction. According to the police, in their perception, there is no threat to the life or person of the petitioner. The petitioner can visit his mother at the house of the 6th respondent without any obstruction from the 6th respondent provided he goes there only to visit his mother. No further directions are necessary in W.P(c) No.13213 of 2011-B 3 this matter. If there be any contumacious or culpable conduct on the part of respondents 5 to 7 against the petitioner, the police shall take necessary action, undertakes the learned Government Pleader. 6. We have considered the submissions on behalf of the petitioner, respondents 5 to 7 and the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 to 4. We are satisfied that no further specific directions are necessary under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. We accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader. If there be any obstruction contrary to the submissions made before this Court to the attempt of the petitioner to visit his mother, the petitioner can complain and the police shall ensure that the petitioner is permitted to visit his mother peacefully and without any obstruction from respondents 5 to 7. 7. This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with the above observations. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/