Kerala High Court
Unknown vs By Advs.Sri.K.M.Firoz on 6 February, 2018
Author: K. Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran, Ashok Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 17TH MAGHA, 1939
WP(C).No. 16629 of 2016
------------------------
PETITIONER
-----------
MAYUF MOHAMMED ALI,
S/O.MUHAMMED ALI, AGED 39 YEARS, ERACHAM HOUSE,
CHALAM PADAM DESOM, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.M.FIROZ
SMT.M.SHAJNA
SRI.S.KANNAN
SMT.UMMUL FIDA
RESPONDENTS:
-------------
1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
IRINJALAKUDA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR -680 121.
2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
IRINJALAKUDA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR -680 121.
3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR -680 121.
4. DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (RURAL),
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR - 6820 003.
5. THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
6. VICENT,
S/O.KORATH AUGUSTINE, CHANTHAPPURAYIL,
IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR -680 121.
7. REVEENDRAN A.R.,
S/O.RAJAPPAN, AMBALATH PARAMBIL HOUSE,
IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR -680 121.
R1-R5 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI P P THAJUDDIN
R6-R7 BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-02-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 16629 of 2016 ::2::
APPENDIX
---------
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY 6TH RESPONDENT
DT.12.12.2013 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER TOGETHER WITH ITS
FREE ENGLISH TRNASLATION.
EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY 7TH RESPONDENT DT.
13.12.2013 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER TOGETHER WITH ITS FREE
ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
DT. 12.4.2016 BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH ITS RECEIPT TOGETHER
WITH ITS FREE ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT. 12.4.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS RECEIPT
TOGETHER WITH ITS FREE ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 4TH RESPONDENT ON 16.4.2016 TOGETHER WITH POSTAL
ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD EVIDENCING RECEIPT OF THE SAME ON THE 4TH
RESPONDENT TOGETHER WITH ITS FREE ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CMP NO. 2812/2016 ON THE FILES OF
THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, IRINJALAKUDA
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TOGETHER WITH FREE ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.
EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT TOGETHER WITH FREE ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT/REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER DT. 25.4.2016 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT TOGETHER
WITH FREE ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT/REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
DT. 25.4.2016 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT TOGETHER WITH FREE
ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT/REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
DT. 26.4.2016 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT TOGETHER WITH FREE
ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT/REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
DT. 26.4.2016 BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT TOGETHER WITH FREE
ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
TRUE COPY
P.A TO JUDGE
jma
K. Vinod Chandran & Ashok Menon, JJ
- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P(C) No.16629 of 2016 C
----------------- -----------
Dated this the 06th day of February, 2018
JUDGMENT
K. Vinod Chandran, J The petitioner was before this Court seeking police protection from the threats of the respondents 6 and 7 who are alleged to be money lenders. The petitioner contended that he had discharged all the liability together with interest. But even then, the respondent 6 and 7 were trying to extort further money from the petitioner. An interim order was granted affording adequate police protection to the person of the petitioner and his family members. The petitioner now submits that as of now there is no threat. The respondents 6 and 7 also would deny the allegation raised in the writ petition and asserts that they never threatened the petitioner nor do they intend to perpetrate any criminal acts against the WPC.No. 16629/2016 :2: petitioner. In such circumstances, recording the undertaking of the respondents 6 and 7, writ petition would stand disposed of directing the police to look into the matter if any complaint is received from the petitioner. No costs.
K. Vinod Chandran, Judge Ashok Menon, Judge jma