Dismissed

Sudhar v. the Circle Inspector of Police (Station House Officer)

Kerala HC3 Jun 2019WP(C)/15070/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking police protection filed by temple committee members. The court held that civil disputes pending between the petitioners and respondents could not serve as grounds for police protection, especially in the absence of supporting documents or material proving immediate threat.

What did the court decide?

writ petition dismissed as civil disputes cannot form the ground for ordering police protection without supporting material.

Sudhar Vs the Circle Inspector of Police (Station… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶6

MONDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1941

¶7

WP(C).No. 15070 of 2019

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

1 SUDHAR AGED 64 YEARS S/O. GANGADHARAN, MANIVILA VEEDU, KADAKKAVOOR DESOM, KADAKKAVOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶10

2 RENJITHKUMAR, AGED 65 YEARS S/O. MADHAVAN RESIDING IN VANEE GARDEN, ATTINGAL DESOM, ATTINGAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶11

3 PRASANNAN, AGED 68 YEARS S/O. KUNJUKRISHNAN, THANUJA MANDIRAM, KADAKKAVOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶12

BY ADVS. SMT.T.SUJA SRI.M.CHANDRAN

¶13

RESPONDENT/S:

¶14

1 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE (STATION HOUSE OFFICER), KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 309.

¶15

W.P.(C) No.15070 of 2019

¶16

¶17

2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 695 101.

¶18

3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶19

4 SASIDHARAN, AGED 72 YEARS S/O. KUNJUKRISHNAN, PERIGATE VEEDU, KADAKKAVOOR DESOM, KADAKKAVOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 695 309.

¶20

5 AJITH, AGED 42 YEARS

¶21

S/O. GOPINATHAN RESIDING IN NILAKKAMUKKU DESOM, EDIVEENAVILA VEEDU, VAKKOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 308.

¶22

OTHER PRESENT:

¶23

SRI P.P THAJUDHEEN SR GP

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

03.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE

¶26

W.P.(C) No.15070 of 2019

JUDGMENT

V.G.ARUN, J.

Petitioners 1 and 2 claim to be the Secretary and Treasurer of the Administration Committee of the Ayantavila Sree Mahalakshmy Devaswom, Kadakkavoor. The 3^rd petitioner claims to be a member of the Trust which administers the temple. According to the petitioners, the 4^th respondent, the former Secretary of the Administration Committee and the 5^th respondent, a member of the Trust are on inimical terms with the petitioners, after the election of the petitioners as officer bearers of the Committee on 25.4.2019. It is submitted that the 4^th respondent, styling himself to be the Secretary of the Administrative Committee, filed a civil suit against some of the members of the Trust and obtained an injunction order. It is further submitted that though the 1st

¶31

W.P.(C) No.15070 of 2019

¶32

¶33

petitioner filed a civil suit and obtained an injunction order against the 4^th respondent, that order was directed to be kept in abeyance by the court, on coming to know that an injunction order had already been granted in the suit filed by the 4^th respondent. It is alleged that there is every possibility of respondents 4 and 5 and their men causing hurt to the petitioners and other members of the Committee. It is contended that though a complaint was filed before the Police, no action has been taken till date. Hence the writ petition seeking a direction to the police to afford adequate protection to the life and property of the petitioners and their family.

¶34

A plain reading of the averments in the writ petition makes it abundantly clear that civil disputes are pending between the petitioners and the party respondents, with respect to the administration of the temple and that the 4^th

¶35

W.P.(C) No.15070 of 2019

¶36

¶37

respondent has obtained an injunction order in his favour. Other than the pleadings, no supporting document, even with regard to the orders passed by the civil court, is produced in the writ petition. The attempt of the petitioners, through the writ petition, is obviously to get over the civil court order with the help of the Police. The practice of filing writ petitions seeking police protection, the cause of action for which is the civil disputes between the parties cannot be entertained. A mere allegation of threat to life, without any supporting material, cannot be the ground for ordering police protection.

¶38

In the result, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶41

Scl/3.06

¶42

W.P.(C) No.15070 of 2019

¶43

¶44

APPENDIX

¶45

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶46

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶47

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DYSP ATTINGAL (2ND RESPONDENT).

¶48

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3RD RESPONDENT, DATED 17.5.2019

Sudhar v. the Circle Inspector of Police (Station House Officer)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhar v. the Circle Inspector of Police (Station House Officer)

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

Davood Vs District Police Chief

Deepak Kumar Vs the Commissioner of Police

Mary Margret Vs Prameela Forgod.a

Neil Entertainment Vs Commissioner of Police

Dr.Francis Puthanangadi Vs the Circle Inspector of Police

Suresh.K.S Vs State of Kerala