Disposed

Gopinathan Pillai P v. Vs Circle Inspector of Police

Kerala HC5 Jul 2018WP(C)/5290/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking police protection from alleged intimidation by a sibling regarding a property dispute. Holding that civil suits were pending, the Court ruled that the matter should be resolved in civil court and granted liberty for alternative civil remedies.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was closed with liberty granted to the petitioner to invoke all remedies available under the civil law.

Gopinathan Pillai P v Vs Circle Inspector of Police — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 14TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶7

WP(C).No. 5290 of 2018

¶8

PETITIONER(S)

¶9

GOPINATHA PILLAI P. V., AGED 70 YEARS, S/O.VASUDEVA KURUPPU, AARRYALAYAM, AERATHVADAKKU MURI, THAZHATHUVADAKKU P.O., PATTAZHY VADAKKAEKKARA VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV.SRI.PADAYATTEE YELDO

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶13

2. P.V.SOMARAJAN PILLAI, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O.VASUDEVA KURUPPU, PONAL HOUSE, THAZHATHUVADAKKU MURI P.O., PATTAZHY VADAKKAEKARA VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶14

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No. 5290 of 2018 (I)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.(C) 1676/2017 DATED 07.06.2017. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS DATED 20.05.16. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE HOME MINISTER DATED 25.06.2016.

¶20

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 03.01.2018.

¶21

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

TRUE COPY

PA TO JUDGE

Scl.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶26

¶27

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JJ.

¶28

------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 5290 of 2018

¶29

Dated this the 5^th day of July, 2018

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

Devan Ramachandran J .

¶32

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking directions to the 1^st respondent Circle Inspector of Police, Kollam, to afford him adequate and effective police protection from the intimidation and threat allegedly meted out to him by the second respondent.

¶33

The petitioner concedes that the second respondent is his brother but says that, their relationship is fraught with acrimony as regards a pathway leading to his residence. The petitioner submits that he has filed a civil suit, numbered as O.S.No.224 of 2016, wherein he has applied for declaration of his easement and rights over the said pathway as also another suit numbered, as O.S.409 of 2016 on the files of the Munsiff's Court, Pualur, seeking partition of certain extents of property

¶34

W.P.(C) No. 5290 of 2018

¶35

-2-

¶36

from the second respondent and his sister, a certain Smt.S.Radhamaniamma. The petitioner says that pending the suit, the second respondent installed a gate through the pathway intending solely to obstruct him and that he is abusing and threatening the petitioner when he attempts to use the pathway, thus impeding his legitimate right of way through it.

¶37

The learned Government Pleader, who has obtained

¶38

instructions in this matter from the 1^st respondent, submits that the disputes between the parties are in the realm of civil law and that the police would not be in a position to intervene in this matter in any manner whatsoever. According to him, the apprehension of the petitioner is that his right of way through the pathway will be obstructed and that in the complaint preferred before the police he has only alleged that the second respondent is using abusive words and vituperatives whenever the petitioner or his guest and relatives

¶39

try to use pathway. The learned Government Pleader reiterates that the police are unable to effectively intervene in

¶40

W.P.(C) No. 5290 of 2018

¶41

-3-

¶42

the matter, since civil suits are already pending and because the disputes between the parties are not something which fall into their ambit of jurisdiction.

¶43

On a consideration of the pleadings, and materials on record as also the submissions made before us by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, we are of the view that this is not a fit case where we can direct the police to offer continuous police protection solely on the accusation of the petitioner that the second respondent or the petitioner's sister, Smt.Radhamaniamma, are allegedly attempting to obstruct the pathway and that they are using abusing words. Since the civil suits are already pending before the courts of competent jurisdiction, it is certainly for the petitioner to approach such court for appropriate reliefs, including for removal of the gate allegedly installed by the second respondent, obstructing his right of way through the pathway in question.

¶44

However, that said, the police have a duty to ensure that law and order is maintained and that any

¶45

W.P.(C) No. 5290 of 2018

¶46

-4-

¶47

complaint made by any of the parties relating to the attempt or the commission of a cognizable offence, is adequately taken note of and to act as per law, leading to effective and appropriate action on it.

¶48

Subject to the above observations, we close this writ petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to invoke all

¶49

remedies as already available to him under the civil law.

¶50

Sd/-

¶51

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶52

JUDGE

¶53

Sd/-

¶54

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶55

Scl/5.07.2018

Gopinathan Pillai P v. Vs Circle Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopinathan Pillai P v. Vs Circle Inspector of Police

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

Cochin Devaswom Board Vs the State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Abraham Thomas

Amina Sherif Vs the State of Kerala

Shaharban Vs State of Kerala

Guruvayur Devaswom Vs Venugopal.T.K

Jayaprakash Vs Sudhakaran Kartha