Kerala High Court
Rajan K.K vs City Police Commissioner on 3 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 14TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.29171 OF 2020(V)
PETITIONERS:
1 RAJAN K.K.,
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. KUMARAN, KANNUMKUZHIYIL HOUSE, KOOTHUPPARA
DESOM, MINALUR P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680581.
2 MOHINI
AGED 62 YEARS
W/O. RAJAN K.K, KANNUMKUZHIYIL HOUSE, KOOTHUPPARA
DESOM, MINALUR P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680581.
3 SHINOSH K R
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O. RAJAN, KANNUMKUZHIYIL HOUSE, KOOTHUPPARA DESOM,
MINALUR P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680581.
BY ADV. SRI.K.I.SAGEER
RESPONDENTS:
1 CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER
THRISSUR CITY, THRISSUR- 680001.
2 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
KUNNAMKULAM P.O, KUNNAMKULAM, PIN CODE - 680503,
THRISSUR DISTRICT.
3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER/INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
WADAKANCHERY POLICE STATION, WADAKANCHERY P.O,
THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680582.
4 STATION HOUSE OFFICER/INSPECTOR OF POLICE
MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, MEDICAL COLLEGE
COMPOUND P.O, PERINGANDOOR, PIN CODE - 680596,
THRISSUR DISTRICT.
5 SREEJI
S/O. PRABHA, MADATHUMPADIKKAL HOUSE,
MUNDATHICODE P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680601.
WP(C).No.29171 OF 2020 2
R5 BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
SRI PP THAJUDEEN, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
03.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.29171 OF 2020 3
JUDGMENT
The petitioners 1 and 2 are the parents of the 3rd petitioner.
According to the petitioners, the 5th respondent is inimical to the petitioners
as he is under the mistaken impression that the 3rd petitioner is having a
relationship with his wife. It is submitted that on 16.12.2020 and on the
subsequent day i.e., on 17.12.2020, the 5th respondent along with his
friends attacked the petitioners 1 and 2. Crime No.925 of 2020 of the
Medical College Police Station and Crime No.1155 of 2020 of Vadakkanchery
Police Station were registered against the 5th respondent and his men.
Petitioners apprehend that the 5th respondent would attempt to cause them
hurt. They have lodged a complaint before the 3rd respondent seeking
intervention. Their grievance is that the police authorities are not taking any
action against the 5th respondent and his men except for registering a
crime. It is in the aforesaid circumstances that they have approached this
Court seeking directions to respondents 1 to 4 to provide adequate and
sufficient protection to the life of the petitioners from any threats or
harassment by the 5th respondent.
2. The 1st respondent has filed a statement for and on behalf of
respondents 2 to 4. It is stated that based on the complaint lodged by the
petitioners, crimes have been registered and the accused were arrested.
They were later released on bail by the jurisdictional Magistrate by imposing
stringent conditions which includes a condition that they shall not involve in
any other crimes. If information is received that any such attempt is made
and if the same is found genuine, the police shall approach the
jurisdictional Magistrate and seek cancellation.
3. The 5th respondent has filed a counter affidavit. It is stated
that the 3rd petitioner is in a relationship with his wife and when this was
questioned, false accusations are now being levelled. He contends that he
has been falsely implicated. According to the 5th respondent, he is aware of
the conditions imposed by the Court and hence, will not endeavour to get
his bail cancelled. According to him, the allegations levelled in the petition
are baseless and have been made with the sole intention to harass him.
4. I have considered the submissions advanced. From the
statement filed by the 1st respondent it is apparent that two crimes have
been registered at the instance of the petitioners. Stringent conditions have
been imposed by the learned Magistrate to ensure that the accused refrain
from committing any further crimes. The 5th respondent has also
undertaken before this Court that he has no intention to take law into his
own hands and cause any harm to the petitioners. In that view of the
matter, the apprehension of the petitioners appears to be misconceived.
5. Be that as it may, if the 5th respondent threatens the
petitioners or attempts to cause them any harm or violates the conditions
imposed while granting bail, they may approach the respondents 3 and 4
and lodge their complaint. The police shall enquire into the same and if the
allegations are found genuine, appropriate action shall be taken.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
sru
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF CASUALTY REGISTRATION CARD
ISSUED BY GOVT.MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL
DATED 16.12.2020 ISSUED TO THE 1ST
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF CASUALTY REGISTRATION CARD
ISSUED BY GOVT.MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL
DATED 16.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF CASUALTY REGISTRATION CARD
ISSUED BY GOVT.MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL
DATED 16.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 16.12.2020
SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT POLICE.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE
OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 1155/2020
OF WADAKANCHERY POLICE STATION.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
925/2020 OF MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE
STATION DATED 17.12.2020.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
