The High Court dismissed a writ petition for police protection. The Court held that the dispute over property boundaries is a civil matter and the Police cannot be asked to intervene in civil disputes. Consequently, no order for protection was made.
No order for police protection was granted; the writ petition was dismissed.
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.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 17TH SRAVANA, 1941
WP(C).No.9912 OF 2019(L)
PETITIONER/S:
1 K.K.REMA, AGED 52 YEARS RESIDING AT C.C.33/1284-B(CERA 72), KIZHINJARAPPILLY PUTHENCHIRA HOUSE,
VENNALA P.O., CHALIKKAVATTOM, KOCHI - 682 028.
2 ANILKUMAR P.B., RESIDING AT C.C.33/1284-B (CERA 72), KIZHINJARAPPILLI PUTHENCHIRA HOUSE, VENNALA P.O., CHALIKKAVATTOM, KOCHI - 682 028.
BY ADVS. SRI.P.M.JOSEPH SRI.P.S.SAJEEV (CHIRAYIL)
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ADDL.CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVT., HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 STATE POLICE CHIEF, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 010.
WPC 9912 - 2019 ..2..
R6-8 BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV R6-8 BY ADV. SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN R6-8 BY ADV. SRI.V.VINAY R6-8 BY ADV. SRI.D.FEROZE BY SR.GP SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 9912 - 2019 ..3..
JUDGMENT
K.VINOD CHANDRAN,J
The petitioners are husband and wife, who
have a small property within the jurisdiction of the Palarivattom Police Station. The respondents 6 and 7 are admittedly neighbours of the writ
petitioners. When there was a construction
of boundary wall attempted by the petitioners, the respondents 6 and 7 objected to it. It is submitted that the 8th respondent, a political party leader interfered in the matter. There is also allegations of assault and threats levelled against the petitioners.
WPC 9912 - 2019 ..4..
mediation, which failed.
the issue is also on the exact demarcation of boundaries, we are not inclined to order any police protection, since the Police cannot be allowed to involve in civil
matters. We are fortified by the decision this Court in John V.O. v. Circle Inspector of Police Kollloorkadu Police Station,
Ernakulam and Others [2018 KHC 3260] .
WPC 9912 - 2019 ..5..
4.The learned Counsel for the petitioners
then made a fervent plea that their life is threatened. We do not think that any life
threat is evident from the pleadings herein.
In fact, there is a civil dispute pending and it was sought to be converted into a life threat. In any event, the Police are bound to maintain the law order in the area.
However, they cannot be asked to involve in civil disputes.
In such circumstance, the writ petition
would stand dismissed. No order as to costs.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
SB/08/08/2019
WPC 9912 - 2019 ..6..
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT P1 | A TRUE COPY 19/05/2018 I EDAPPALLY (S) |
OF PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT DATED SSUED TO 1ST PETITIONER BY VILLAGE OFFICE. |
|---|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P2 | A TRUE COP NO.KRR8/4843 MUNICIPAL COR |
Y OF OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE DATED 09/08/2016 OF KOCHI PORATION. |
| EXHIBIT P3 | A TRUE COPY 21/03/2019 RE |
OF F.I.R.NO.565/2019 DATED GISTERED BY 5TH RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P4 | A TRUE COPY SUBMITTED BY |
OF PETITION DATED 28/03/2019 THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE |
| 5TH RESPOND PRINTOUT OF V |
ENT APPENDED WITH COPY OF ISUALS TAKEN FROM CC TV. |
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO.372/P1/PIN/19/ER14 DATED 28/03/2019 ISSUED BY 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF PRINT OUTS OF PHOTOGRAPHS OF VISUALS TAKEN FROM CC TV CAMERA OF PETITIONER'S HOUSE. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS IN IA. 5276/2019 IN O.S.NO.996/2019 BEFORE HONBLE MUNSIFF III COURT, ERNAKULAM EXHIBIT P8 PHOTOGRAPHS EVIDENCING THE HARASSMENT AND TEASIN BY DIFFERENT METHODS INCLUDING CAUSING OBSTRUCTION ON PATHWAY TO PETITIONERS HOUSE BLOCKED WIHT TROLLEY AND DOGS CAGE EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF PETITION FILED BY 2ND PETITIONER WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO. 238/2007 DATED 30.06.2007 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT
WPC 9912 - 2019 ..7..
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF PETITION ALONG WIHT COUNTER RECEIPT REF.NO.CHO 014056 DATED 22.05.2007 ISSUED BY THE COCHIN CORPORATION TO THE 1ST PETITIONER
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R6 (A)
TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS NO 996/2019 BEFORE THE MUNSIFFS COURT, ERNAKULAM
// TRUE COPY //
P.A TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether police protection can be ordered in a civil dispute regarding property boundaries.
Whether the pleadings reveal a life threat justifying police intervention in a civil matter.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
John V.O. v. Circle Inspector of Police Kollloorkadu Police Station, Ernakulam and OthersRelied on¶38
John V.O. v. Circle Inspector of Police Kollloorkadu Police Station, Ernakulam and Others [2018 KHC 3260]
K.K.REMA
ANILKUMAR P.B.
STATE OF KERALA
STATE POLICE CHIEF
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOCHI CITY
LALY NIXON
K.VINOD CHANDRAN
V.G.ARUN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
