The Kerala High Court disposed of a writ petition for police protection and registration of a crime. The court made the interim protection order absolute, leaving the issue of crime registration open for independent pursuit.
Interim order for police protection made absolute; other prayers disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
THURSDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2010 / 24TH ASHADHA 1932
WP(C).No. 15545 of 2010(P)
PETITIONER:
JOSEPH, AGED 76 YEARS, S/O. KURIAN, KUZHIVILA VEEDU, ST. THOMAS NAGAR, MANGAD.P.O, KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.THYPARAMBIL THOMAS THOMAS
RESPONDENTS:
GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI T K VIPINDAS FOR R1-3 ADV. SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ FOR R4
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 15545 of 2010
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.14.5.2010.
EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :
// TRUE COPY//
K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
JUDGMENT
Joseph, J.
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking th following reliefs:
“i) issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioner and his family.
ii) issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioner and his family at least till the finalisation of Crime No., 226/2009 of Kilikolloor Police Station.
iii) issue a writ of mandamus directing 1st respondent to conduct an enquiry of the incident
W.P.(C).No. 15545 of 2010
2
and register a crime against 2nd respondent and respondents 4 to 7 as per Ext.P3 complaint.”
the view that the writ petition is not maintainable. We leave it open to the petitioner to pursue whatever remedy the petitioner has in regard to the said prayer. As regards prayers (i) and (ii) are concerned, briefly the case of the petitioner is as follows.
3
W.P.(C).No. 15545 of 2010
land. The 5th respondent has not given any property for widening the pathway. Later the wife of the 5th respondent filed suit O.S. 562 OF 2009 before the Munsiff Court, Kollam stating that the petitioner and others are trying to occupy her land.
W.P.(C).No. 15545 of 2010
4
daughter using abusive language.
Judge
(M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge
tm
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the relief of protection should be granted in the writ petition.
Whether the petition challenging registration of crime is maintainable.
Joseph
Superintendent of Police, Kollam
Circle Inspector of Police, Vanitha Cell, Kollam
Sub Inspector of Police, Kilikolloor Police Station, Kollam
Dileep
Samuel
K.M. Joseph
M.L. Joseph Francis
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
