Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Syed Alavi Koya vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 5 April, 2013

Author: A.M.Shaffique

Bench: A.M.Shaffique

       

  

  

 
 
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                            PRESENT:

                          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

                   FRIDAY,THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/30TH JYAISHTA, 1936

                                   WP(C).No. 23131 of 2013 (N)
                                      ----------------------------

PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------

        1. SYED ALAVI KOYA,AGED 33 YEARS,
            S/O.SAID MOHAMMED HAJI, ATHIKAVIL HOUSE,
            KUMMINIPARAMBU, PALLIKKAL VILLAGE,
            ERANADU TALUK,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

        2. AHAMMED KOYA, AGED 44 YEARS,
            S/O.MUHAMMED KUTTY,KANNANARI HOUSE,
            KUMMINI PARAMBU,PALLIKKAL VILLAGE,
            ERANADU TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

             BY ADV. SRI.SIRAJ KAROLY

RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------

        1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
             KARIPOOR, MALAPPURAM DIST., PIN -676 552.

        2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
            KONDOTTY, PIN - 673 638.

        3. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
            MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676 505.

        4. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
            MALAPPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
            PIN -676 858.

        5. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
            TIRUR, MALAPPURAM - 676 505.

        6. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER,
            KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,
            DISTRICT OFFICE, MALAPPURAM - 676 505.

        7. NAUFAL SAQUAFI AL-AZHARI THAVANOOR,
            S/O.KOZHIKODEM MUHAMMED MUSLIYAR, PRINCIPAL,
            IHYAU SAKHAFATHISUNNIYA COLLEGE,
            KUMMINIPARAMBU,KONDOTTY - 676 014.

sts                                                                       2/-

                                       -2-


WP(C).NO.23131/2013




    8. M.MOHAMMEDKUTTY,S/O.ABDULLAKUTTY,
       AZHUVALAPPIL HOUSE,KUMMINIPARAMBU P.O.,
       KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM - 676 008.

       R1 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANITHA RAVINDRAN
       R6 BY SRI. M.AJAY, SC, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
       R7 & R8 BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF


       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
       ON 20-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
       THE FOLLOWING:




sts

WP(C).No. 23131 of 2013 (N)
-------------------------------------------

                                             APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------

EXT.P1:              TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE ELECTION
                     COMMISSION OF THE PETITIONERS.

EXHIBIT P2:          TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 05/04/2013 IN WPC.
                     NO.7849/2013 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P3:          TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH OF THE FUNCTION USING THE
                     MICROPHONE CONDUCTED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4:          TRUE COPY OF THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR CONDUCTING APROGRAM
                     AT THE INSTANCE OF THE 7TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5:          TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN FROM THE RESPONDENTS DATED
                     01/06/2013.

EXHIBIT P5(A): TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN FROM THE RESPONDENTS DATED
                      25/06/2013.

EXHIBIT P5(B): TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN FROM THE RESPONDENTS DATED
                      27/06/2013.

EXHIBIT P5(C): TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN FROM THE RESPONDENTS DATED
                     06/08/2013.

EXHIBIT P5(D): TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN FROM THE RESPONDENTS DATED
                     26/06/2013.

EXHIBIT P6:          TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT 3 IN NUMBERS SUBMITTED BY THE
                     PETITIONERS BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 04/09/2013.

EXHIBIT P7:          TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4
                     DATED 04/09/2013.


RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
----------------------------------------

EXHIBIT R8(A) TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION OBTAINED BY THIS RESPONDENT
                      DATED 4/4/2013 FROM SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER,
                      MALAPPURAM

EXHIBIT R8(B) TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION OBTAINED BY THIS RESPONDENT
                      DATED, 18/4/2013 FROM SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER,
                      MALAPPURAM

EXHIBIT R8(C) TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION OBTAINED BY THIS RESPONDENT
                      DATED, 5/5/2013 FROM SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER,
                      MALAPPURAM

sts                                                                         2/-

                                      -2-

WP(C).NO.23131/2013


EXHIBIT R8(D) TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION OBTAINED BY THIS RESPONDENT
              DATED, 2/6/2013 FROM SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER,
              MALAPPURAM

EXHIBIT R8(E) TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION OBTAINED BY THIS RESPONDENT
              DATED, 30/6/2013 FROM SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER,
              MALAPPURAM

EXHIBIT R8(F) TRUEC OPY OF THE PERMISSION OBTAINED BY THIS RESPONDENT
              DATED 1/9/2013 FROM SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER,
              MALAPPURAM

EXHIBIT R8(G) TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY 412
              RESIDENTS IN THE AREA WHERE THE RELIGIOUS FUNCTION IS
              CONDUCTING




                                              /TRUE COPY/


                                              P.A.TO.JUDGE




sts



                        A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.
              ------------------------------------------------
                      W.P.(C) No.23131 of 2013
         -----------------------------------------------------------
               Dated this the 20th day of June, 2014


                             JUDGMENT

Petitioner challenges the action of 7th respondent in using loud speaker, amplified mike systems etc. on the allegation that the same is causing noise pollution. Counter affidavit is filed by the 8th respondent inter alia submitting that they had obtained permission from the police as required under law for the purpose of using amplified mike system etc. That apart it is contended that the addressing system is being used while conducting certain meetings inside the premises of the mosque. In fact, when daily prayers are to be conducted there is a system of using sound system. Whatever that might be, usage of sound system can be done only with due permission from the statutory authorities including police. If the party respondents have to conduct any W.P.(C) No.23131/2013 2 function inside the mosque using sound system, necessary permission has to be obtained in addition to the permission for using the same at the time of daily prayers. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that the Writ Petition can be disposed of as under.

i) 3rd respondent shall ensure that the 7th respondent is using the sound system for the purpose of prayers in the mosque and for meetings only with due permission from the authority.

ii) If the petitioners have any complaint regarding the noise level on such use of sound system they are at liberty to approach 6th respondent with a complaint, who shall take into consideration the level of noise in the area and issue appropriate directions which shall be complied by 7th respondent as well.

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE vdv