Kerala High Court
Hashim vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 23 March, 2017
Author: K.Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1939
WP(C).No. 12317 of 2017(L)
--------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
HASHIM,
S/O. MOIDEEN, KIZHAKKOOTTU (H),
AYIRROR AMSOM DESOM, PONNANI TAUK,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR
SRI.RANJIT BABU
RESPONDENT(S):
-------------
1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
PERUMBADAPPU POLICE STATION,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT PIN-679580.
2. NAVAS,
S/O. ABDULLA, KIZHAKKOOTTU HOUSE,
AYIROOR AMSOM DESOM, PALAPETTY,
PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM PIN-679579.
3. FAIZAL BABU,
S/O. ABDULLA, KIZHAKKOOTTU HOUSE,
AYIROOR AMSOM DESOM, PALAPETTY,
PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM PIN-679579.
4. AYISIVI @ AYISHABI
W/O. ABDULLA, KIZHAKKOOTTU HOUSE,
AYIROOR AMSOM DESOM, PALAPETTY,
PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM PIN-679579.
R1 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.P.THAJUDHEEN
R2-R4 BY ADV. SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-03-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 12317 of 2017 (L)
--------------------------
APPENDIX
----------
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
------------------------
EXHIBIT P1: PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ROAD
EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF ROUGH SKETCH SHOWING THE LIE OF THE
AFORESAID ROADS AND THE HOUSE OF THE PETITIONER
AND THE RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4
EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS.NO.47/2017 ON
THE FILE OF MUNSIFF COURT, PONNANI
EXHIBT P4: COPY OF I.A.NO.388/2017 IN OS.NO.47/2017 ON
THE FILE OF MUNSIFF COURT, PONNANI
EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.03.2017 IN
I.A.NO.388/2017 IN OS.NO.47/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE
MUNSIFF COURT, PONNANI
EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
03.04.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIOER
EXHIBIT P7: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
03.04.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
-----------------------
NIL
/TRUE COPY/
PA TO JUDGE
dkr
K.VINOD CHANDRAN & ASHOK MENON, JJ.
-------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 12317 of 2017
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of March, 2018
JUDGMENT
Ashok Menon, J.
The petitioner is before this Court seeking police assistance to protect his life and to enable him to transport building materials to his property without any let or hindrance by respondents 2 to 4 and their men.
2. The petitioner owns some property jointly with his brother in Ponnani Taluk. They intend to construct a house there. Ext.P1 photographs and Ext.P2 sketch would indicate the lie of the property. There is a pathway having a width of 10-14 feet reaching up to the petitioner's property. When the petitioner attempted to transport building materials in a lorry, respondents 2 to 4 obstructed. The petitioner filed Ext.P3 suit and Ext.P4 application for injunction to restrain respondents 2 and 3 and their men from causing any obstruction to the use of the disputed pathway. Interim injunction was obtained as per Ext.P5. Despite the order of WP(C) 12317/2017 2 injunction, the party respondents continued with their obstruction. They are also holding out threats to the life of the petitioner. Exts.P6 and P7 complaints made to the 1 st respondent did not yield any result and hence the petitioner is before us seeking protection to his life and for safe transportation of building materials through the disputed pathway.
3. An interim order was made by this Court directing the 1 st respondent to provide necessary police protection to the petitioner and ensure that vehicle transport to the petitioner's property shall not be prevented by the respondents 2 to 4 or their men.
4. The party respondents were served with notice, but none appeared. The learned Senior Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that there is no threat to the life of the petitioner as of now. The petitioner has already approached a civil court for remedy and has also obtained a temporary injunction against the obstructors. In case, the party respondents are violating the order of injunction, the petitioner has to seek his remedy before the civil court, where the suit is pending. It will not be appropriate to involve the police authorities for getting the orders of the civil court WP(C) 12317/2017 3 executed by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court. Hence, we are not inclined to issue any positive directions to the police authorities for protection. However, on receiving a petition or a complaint from the petitioner revealing a cognizable offence, the 1st respondent shall proceed in accordance with law. With these observations, the petition is closed. No costs.
K.VINOD CHANDRAN Judge ASHOK MENON Judge dkr