Petitioner sought continuation of police protection ordered earlier. Respondents failed to appear despite service. Court was satisfied that interim order of 8/2/11 could be made absolute and allowed the writ petition.
Interim order dated 8/2/11 directing police to provide protection was made absolute; further proceedings closed.
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 R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2011 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1932
WP(C).No. 3031 of 2011(D) -------------------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------------
PURUSHOTHAMAN, S/O.RAMAN, GOVINDAVILASAM, IRUMBANGAD (P.O), EZHUKON, KOLLAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.C.HARIKUMAR, SMT.MOLLY KOSHY.
RESPONDENTS:
------------------------
1. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM-691 305.
2. SASI.K., S/O.KOCHUCHERUKKAN, ELLUMVILA VEEDU, IRUMBANGAD(P.O), EZHUKON, KOLLAM-691 505.
3. KUNJAMMA, W/O.SIVANANDAN, ELLUMVILA VEEDU, IRUMBANGAD (P.O), EZHUKON, KOLLAM-691 505.
4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EZHUKONE POLICE STATION, KOTTARAKKARA-691 506.
R1 & R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. C.M. CHARISMA.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
prv.
R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
W.P.(C) No. 3031 of 2011-D
Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2011
JUDGMENT
Basant,J.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking issue of directions to respondents 1 and 4 to afford police protection to the petitioner against culpable and violent acts of respondents 2 and 3. According to the petitioner, he was already constrained to approach this Court twice with writ petitions claiming police protection which were allowed; but the same is not being effectively implemented. The petitioner had come to this Court with a grievance that there has been non-compliance with the direction for grant of police protection. But the said petition happened to be dismissed under certain compelling circumstances because earlier orders of the civil court were not produced. According to the petitioner, the party respondents 2
W.P.(C) No. 3031 of 2011 -: 2 :-
and 3 are continuing to indulge in contumacious acts and it is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court seeking fresh directions under Art.226 of the Constitution to afford protection to the petitioner.
“There will be an interim order that the police will provide adequate protection to the life and property of the petitioner. Post after three weeks.”
The party respondents have not chosen to enter appearance so far. The learned Government Pleader submits that the interim order dated 8/2/11 is being complied with strictly. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the interim order may now be made absolute and further proceedings closed.
W.P.(C) No. 3031 of 2011 -: 3 :-
issued on 8/2/11 can be made absolute.
Sd/-
R. BASANT (Judge)
Sd/-
K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the interim order for police protection can be made absolute given the non-appearance of respondents.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
PURUSHOTHAMAN
DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PUNALUR
SASI.K.
KUNJAMMA
SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EZHUKONE
R. BASANT
K. SURENDRA MOHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
