A 98-year-old petitioner alleged contempt by his son for defying earlier writ directions and inadequate police protection. The Government Pleader confirmed protection was offered and undertook continued protection; the son denied violating orders. The contempt case was 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 DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 13TH MAGHA, 1945
CON.CASE(C) NO. 185 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 42272/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
N.SREEDHARAN NAIR
AGED 98 YEARS
S/O. LATE NEELAKANDAN NAIR, FROM PANAN VILAKAM VEEDU,
PANGODE, PERMANENT RESIDENT AT PRASOBHA BHAVAN, T.C N.O.
17/1216 AND T.C N.O. 17/1217, PANGODE, THIRUMALA P.O,
SHASTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695006
BY ADV J.R.PREM NAVAZ
RESPONDENTS/7TH RESPONDENT/ & 5TH RESPONDENT:
1C.S. PRASHOBAN
AGED 65 YEARS, S/O N. SREEDHARAN NAIR, RESIDING AT PARES,
HOUSE NO. 286/1, T.C. NO.9/2762/3, EDAPPAZHANJI, C.S.M.
NAGAR, SASTHAMANGALAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 695010
2SHRI.ROJ.R
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, THE
CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695012
BY ADVS.
J.G.SYAMNATH
V.S.VISWAMBHARAN(K/1284/2009)
SMT. VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 02.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CON.CASE(C) NO. 185 OF 2024
2
JUDGMENT
This contempt case has been filed by the
petitioner, alleging that the 1st respondent is
defying the directions of this Court; while the
2nd respondent – Police officer is not granting
him adequate police protection.
2.However, when this matter was called
today, the learned Government Pleader – Smt.Vidya
Kuriakose, affirmed that the 2nd respondent has
been offering police protection to the petitioner
every time he wanted; but that he was refusing to
go to the house in question. She added that, in
fact, under the orders of this Court, the 2nd
respondent has escorted the petitioner to the
house in question yesterday and that there is no
impediment for him to continue there, if he so
interested. She undertook that the 2nd respondent
will offer protection, as and when it is required
CON.CASE(C) NO. 185 OF 2024
3
by the petitioner, in terms of the directions of
this Court.
Sri.J.G.Syamnath – learned counsel appearing
for the 1st respondent, submitted that, contrary
to the allegations of the petitioner, his client
had never violated the orders of this Court; and
that he has not gone into the house in question
and will not go there without obtaining orders
from a competent Court. This is recorded.
This contempt case is thus closed.
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
SAS
CON.CASE(C) NO. 185 OF 2024
4
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 185/2024
PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES:
Annexure A1THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
20.12.2023 IN WP(C) NO: 42272 OF 2023 PASSED
BY THIS HON'BLE COURT
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the 1st respondent was defying the directions of the Court regarding entry into the house in question?
Whether adequate police protection was being provided to the petitioner?
N.Sreedharan Nair
C.S. Prashoban
Shri.Roj.R (Circle Inspector of Police, Poojappura Police Station)
Devan Ramachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court