Disposed

Blesson Abrham v. the District Police Chief

Kerala HC7 Jan 2021WP(C)/26477/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court of Kerala disposed of the matter by directing the petitioners to seek protection from the police if they face threats. The court directed the police to enquire into genuine complaints of physical harm and take action in accordance with the law.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed by directing petitioners to approach police for protection; police directed to enquire and act on genuine threats.

Blesson Abrham Vs the District Police Chief — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 17TH POUSHA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.26477 OF 2020(H)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 BLESSON ABRHAM AGED 45 YEARS S/O. E.A ABRAHAM, EETTIKALAYIL HOUSE, THOTTAPUZHASSERY, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN 689 549

¶8

2 RAJAN MATHEW, AGED 54 YEARS S/O. BABU MATHEW, AMAYIL PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, MARAMON P.O, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATTANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689 549 MANAGER, TABOR HILLS INTERNATIONAL RESORT AND CONVENTION CENTRE, NAADUNOKKI, KURUSHUMALA-ASHRAM ROAD, VAGAMON, PIN-685 503

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.P.SUJITH KUMAR SRI.S.A.ANAND

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF CIVIL STATION, KOTTAYAM, PIN 686 001

¶12

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ERATTUPETTA POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN 686 121

¶13

3 ROY S/O. P.S MATHEW, PARACKAL VEEDU, NALPATHEKKAR, VAZHIKKADAVU, TEEKOY VILLAGE, PIN 686 580

¶14

4 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN 686 574

¶15

SRI PP THAJUDEEN GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No.26477 OF 2020

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The 1st petitioner is the owner of a resort by name 'Tabor Hills International Resort & Convention Centre'. The aforesaid resort is situated at Vagamon. The 2nd petitioner herein is the Manager of the said resort. The 3rd respondent herein is a nearby resident. The petitioners contend that the 3rd respondent is nursing animosity towards the petitioners and on more than one occasion have trespassed into the resort and have caused physical harm to the employees. Several instances are narrated in the writ petition. It is stated that the petitioners and their workers are living in constant fear. Seeking protection for life and property, they approached the jurisdictional police station and lodged several complaints. They state that no action was taken by the police. Being aggrieved, the petitioners are before this Court seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to afford adequate protection to the life of the petitioners from any threat or highhanded action by the party respondent.

¶21

By order dated 01.12.2020, this Court had directed the 2nd

¶22

respondent to ensure that law and order is maintained.

¶23

Notice was served on the 3rd respondent. However, none

¶24

WP(C).No.26477 OF 2020

¶25

¶26

appears.

¶27

I have heard Sri. Sujith Kumar P., the learned counsel appearing

¶28

for the petitioners and Sri. P.P. Thajudeen, the learned Senior Government Pleader.

¶29

Sri. P.P.Thajudeen, submitted that there are disputes between the 1st petitioner and the 3rd respondent and separate complaints were lodged by them before the police. Both sides were directed to maintain peace and not to precipitate the matter. He points out that though various complaints were lodged by the petitioner, he has not followed it up by furnishing materials or witnesses. Finally, it is submitted that if any incident is brought to the notice of the police, strict action shall be taken and it shall be ensured that no one takes the law into his hands.

¶30

I have considered the submissions advanced. As stated earlier, this Court by an interim order had directed the police to maintain law and order. Though notice was served, there is no appearance for the 3rd respondent. The learned Government pleader has assured that strict action shall be taken by the police if any one causes any incident resulting in breach of peace. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioners herein to approach the 2nd respondent if they have any grievance or threat of physical harm. If any such complaint is received, the

¶31

WP(C).No.26477 OF 2020

¶32

¶33

2nd respondent shall enquire about the complaint and ascertain its

¶34

genuineness. If the same is found genuine, appropriate action shall be taken

¶35

in accordance with law.

¶36

SD/-

¶37

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

¶40

WP(C).No.26477 OF 2020

¶41

¶42

APPENDIX

¶43

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶44

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 26-02-2020 FILED BY SRI JACKSON BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT

¶45

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 13-11-2020 FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER OF ERATTUPETTA POLICE STATION

¶46

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 23-11-2020 ISSUED BY ERATTUPETTA POLICE STATION

¶47

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 13-11-2020 FILED BY 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶48

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶49

NIL

Blesson Abrham v. the District Police Chief

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Blesson Abrham v. the District Police Chief

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

K.J.Stephen Vs State Police Chief

Ambika Devi T. Vs Biju Prabhakar , IAS

Arbaz Khan Vs State of Kerala

Indus Towers Limited Vs the District Collector

Unaisa Vs the District Collector

C.v.Radhakrishnan Vs P.S. Srrekumar