Allowed

Kuppuswamy v. the Dy.S.P, Kottayam

Kerala HC9 Jul 2010WP(C)/20529/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court converted an interim order mandating police protection for the petitioner against the threats and hirelings of respondent Nos.4 to 6 into an absolute order on the day it was heard.

What did the court decide?

The interim order passed on 1.7.2010 commanding respondent Nos.1 and 3 to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner and their family members from the threat of respondent Nos.4 to 6 was mad

Kuppuswamy Vs the Dy.S.P, Kottayam — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS

¶3

FRIDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2010 / 18TH ASHADHA 1932

¶4

WP(C).No. 20529 of 2010(M)

PETITIONER(S):

KUPPUSWAMY, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.DWARAISWAMY, THOTTATHIL VEETIL, VEDASANTHOOR, THATTARAPATTY.P.O, DITINAL DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT SABARIGIRI VEETIL, PUZHAVATHU MURI PERUNNA, CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.AJITH MURALI

¶10

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

¶11

THE DEPUTY SUPRENDENTANENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 686 001.

¶12

THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 686 001.

¶13

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHANGANASSERY POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 686 001.

¶14

SURESH, AGED 40 YEARS, SWARNADHARFA, PAZHAVEEDU, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 688 001.

¶15

MURUKAN, AGED 35 YEARS, SWARNADHARFA, PAZHAVEEDU, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 688 001.

¶16

NAJEEB, AGED 26 YEARS, NAJEEB MANZIL, LAYANATH MURI, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶17

R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS.

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WPC NO.20529 OF 2010-M

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶21

EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.415/2010 OF ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION.

¶22

K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.

¶23

------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.20529 of 2010-M

¶24

Dated, this the 9^th day of July, 2010

¶25

J U D G M E N T

¶26

K.M.Joseph, J.

¶27

The prayers in the writ petition are as follows:

¶28

“i. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondent Nos.1 and 3 to provide adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioner and their family members from the threat of the respondent No.4 to 6 and their hirelings;

¶29

ii. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondent Nos.1 and 3 to provide adequate police protection for conducting the textile shop of the petitioner without the obstruction and threat of the respondent No.4 to 6 and his hirelings.”

¶30

We have already passed an interim order in this

¶31

matter on 1.7.2010. Though served there is no appearance

¶32

for the party respondents. We heard the learned counsel for

¶33

the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. We dispose of the writ petition by making the interim order absolute.

¶34

(K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE.

¶35

(M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE.

¶36

Kuppuswamy v. the Dy.S.P, Kottayam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuppuswamy v. the Dy.S.P, Kottayam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Noorudheen Vs the Sub Inspector of Police, Kunnamkulam

Shamseer.T Vs Sub Inspector of Police and Others

Roy Vs the Circle Inspector of Police & Others

Mathew V.E. Vs Circle Inspector of Police

Sajitha Vs S.I. of Police Erumapetty & Others

Usha Devi Vs the Superintendent of Police,Pathanamthi