Sathi Rajendran vs District Police Chief

Kerala High Court

Sathi Rajendran vs District Police Chief on 23 May, 2024

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
        THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
                       WP(C) NO. 15723 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:

    1       SATHI RAJENDRAN, AGED 56 YEARS, W/O. RAJENDRAN
            SREESIVAM VENGARA, THODIYOOR KOLLAM, PIN - 690518

    2       RAJENDRAN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. KUNJIKRISHNAN SREESIVAM
            VENGARA, THODIYOOR KOLLAM, PIN - 690518

            SADCHITH.P.KURUP
            C.P.ANIL RAJ
            SIVA SURESH
            ATHIRA VIJAYAN
            B.SREEDEVI



RESPONDENTS:

    1       DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
            OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF LINK ROAD,
            ASRAMAM KOLLAM, PIN - 691001

    2       THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
            KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM,
            PIN - 690518

    3       SURESH, ASHA BHAVAN THODIYOOR, KOLLAM, PIN - 690518

    4       BEENA, W/O. SURESH ASHA BHAVAN THODIYOOR,
            KOLLAM, PIN - 690518

    5       SATHEENDRAN
            ASHA BHAVAN THODIYOOR, KOLLAM, PIN - 690518

            SMT.REKHA C.NAIR - SR.GP.


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 15723 OF 2024
                                  2


                              JUDGMENT

The petitioners concede that they have borrowed gold worth Rs.8,50,000/- from M/s.Sayan Gold, Karunagappally, where the fourth respondent is working and say that this was promised to be paid off in installments. They explain that, due to certain reasons, they were unable to do so and that the third respondent, who is the husband of the fourth respondent, attacked them brutally, and that they have now been meted out with continuous threats and intimidation, saying that they have connection with certain political parties which was, in fact, subsequently demonstrated on 31.01.2024, when they were again attacked in front of the office of the said party office.

2. The petitioners allege that they were physically attacked, verbally abused and damage was caused to the residence and its facilities; thus constraining the 1 st petitioner to approach the 2nd respondent with Ext.P3 request for protection. They have produced Ext.P2 in substantiation and say that the gravity of the threat being faced by them is so high, that it is now impossible for them to live without protection; and assert that this is manifest from Ext.P5 FIR. They allege that, however, since no further action has been taken by the Police, they have been constrained to approach this Court through this writ petition. WP(C) NO. 15723 OF 2024 3

3. I notice from the files that, even though service of summons from this Court has been validly completed on respondents 3 and 4, they have chosen not to be present in person or to be represented through counsel; inferentially guiding me to the impression that they have nothing to offer in opposition to the various reliefs sought for in this writ petition.

4. Smt.Rekha C.Nair - learned Senior Government Pleader, submitted that the Police have already taken cognizance of petitioner's complaint and are offering them adequate protection. She added that the fifth respondent is not anywhere in the vicinity and therefore, that no further order against him may be necessary.

5. I have no doubt that the Police are obligated to protect the lives and properties of citizens and this includes that of the petitioners also. The disputes between the parties are not something into which the Police can intervene, but they cannot allow them to degenerate into a law and order issue, nor to a situation where the parties take law into their own hands.

6. In the afore perspective, I allow this writ petition and direct the second respondent to afford adequate and effective protection to the lives and properties of the petitioners and WP(C) NO. 15723 OF 2024 4 ensure that they are kept away from any threat from the party respondents or their men. The said Officer will also ensure that law and order is maintained and that no one is allowed to commit any act which is in violation of peace.

The afore direction shall be overseen by the first respondent - District Police Chief.

That said, it is needless to say that the remedies of respondents 3 to 5 against the petitioners, if any, are fully left open; and the merits of the internecine disputes, if any, as also the rival contentions, are left undecided.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 15723 OF 2024 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15723/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE DATED 29.9.2022 ISSUED BY THE THODIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT IN THE NAME OF THE 1ST PETITIONER Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 06.01.2024 FILED BEFORE THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM DISTRICT Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 1.2.2024 FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 1.2.2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO. 248/2024 DATED 09.02.2024 OF KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION