S.Ramanakumar vs The District Police Chief (Rural)
2021 Latest Caselaw 5327 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

 MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 26TH MAGHA,1942

                  WP(C).No.25140 OF 2020(N)

PETITIONER/S:
            S.RAMANAKUMAR, AGED 73 YEARS
            S/O. SIVANANDAN, VAYALIL VEEDU, THAZHE
            VETTOOR, VARKALA NOW RESIDING AT ADHITHYA
            PRABHA, KRA -D4, T.C. 4/224, MARKET JUNCTION,
            KURAVANKONAM, KAUDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
            DISTRICT - 695003.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.B.S.SIVAJI
             SRI.V.R.SWAMINATHAN
             SMT.DHANYA SREENIVASAN

RESPONDENT/S:
      1     THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (RURAL)
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695033.

     2       THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
             ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695101.

     3       THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
             VENJARAMMOODU POLICE STATION, VENJARAMMOODU,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

     4       THE NELLAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH
             VENJARAMOOD P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
             REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 695607.

     5       RAJESH, HOUSE NO.10, MARIYAM COLONY,
             VETTUVILAKAM, NELLAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695607.

             R1-3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

OTHER PRESENT:
            SRI SUNIL NATH N.B- GOVERNMENT PLEADER

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 15.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                          -2-
W.P.(C). No. 25140 of 2020



                                     JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article

226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus

commanding respondents 1 to 3 to give adequate police

protection to the life of the petitioner and his family. The

petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus

commanding the 3rd respondent to take action against the 5 th

respondent, on the basis of Ext.P3 complaint. Going by the

averments in the writ petition, the petitioner is in absolute

ownership and possession of 18 Are 85 sqm of property in

Sy.No.486/11 of Nellad Village in Nedumangadu Taluk covered

by sale deed bearing No.2102 of 1993 of the Sub Registrar

Office, Vamanapuram. The petitioner is also having properties

in Sy.No.486/2, 486/9 and 494/7. The document marked as

Ext.P1 is the land tax receipt in respect of the said properties.

The petitioner and his wife are also having property in

Sy.No.487/13, 486/3 and 486/4 of Nellad Village, having a

total extent of 257.15 Ares. The petitioner's wife submitted

application for building permit before the 4 th respondent

W.P.(C). No. 25140 of 2020

Nellad Grama Panchayat for the construction of a residential

building with a compound wall. The document marked as

Ext.P2 is the building permit dated 25.10.2019 issued by the

4th respondent, which is valid upto 27.11.2022. In the writ

petition, it is alleged that the petitioner constructed compound

wall for the entire land, except the land in Sy.No.486/11.

When the petitioner started the construction of compound wall

in Sy.No.486/11, the 5th respondent along with others,

prevented the construction on the southern side of the

property in that survey number. On 27.10.2020 and thereafter

on 05.11.2020, the 5th respondent and others trespassed into

the property and obstructed the construction of compound

wall. Therefore, the petitioner submitted Ext.P5 complaint

dated 09.11.2020 before the 3rd respondent Station House

Officer, seeking police protection to the life and property of

the petitioner and the members of his family.

2. On 17.11.2020, when this writ petition came up for

admission, notice before admission was ordered to

respondents. The learned Government Pleader took notice for

W.P.(C). No. 25140 of 2020

respondents 1 to 3. The learned Standing Counsel took notice

for the 4th respondent. Urgent notice by speed post was

ordered to the 5th respondent. Having regard to the

submissions advanced, this Court directed the 3rd respondent

Station House Officer to ensure that law and order is

maintained.

3. Along with a memo filed by the learned

Government Pleader dated 21.1.2021, the report of the 3 rd

respondent Station House Officer is placed on record;

paragraphs 2 and 3 of that statement read thus:

"The gist of the petition is that the petitioner of the said WPC Sri.S.Ramanakumar, age 73, S/o.

Sivanandan and his wife having 257 Are 15 Sqm property in survey No.486/2011, 487/2013, 486/3, 486/4 of Nellanadu Village within the jurisdictional limit of Venjaramoodu Police Station. The alleged petition is that the petitioner decided to construct a building therein and they submitted a building plan before the 4th respondent for the construction of compound wall and it was sanctioned. The petitioner was started constructing the compound wall, the 5 th respondent along with some people prevented the construction

W.P.(C). No. 25140 of 2020

alleged that some trees standing in the property belongs to them and they threatened that the construction if is continued they will do away the petitioner and workers and they forcefully taken away the tools of the workers. According to the petitioner, he has not violated the building permit or any other law. Under the said circumstances the petitioner had filed a complaint before me (3rd respondent), on going through the enquiry the petitioner and the 5 th respondent were summoned to the Venjaramoodu Police Station and heard their version. Since the matter seems to be civil in nature both the parties were directed to the revenue authorities to clarify the alleged matters and advised them to resurvey the disputed property in the presence if the revenue officials. The petitioner was ensured that adequate police protection will given for the construction if legally prove that he has the absolute possession of the said property."

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

also the learned Government Pleader appearing for

respondents 1 to 3. Despite service of notice, none appears

for the 5th respondent.

5. The Kerala Police Act, 2011 is enacted to

consolidate and amend the law relating to the establishment,

W.P.(C). No. 25140 of 2020

regulation, powers and duties of the Police Force in the State

of Kerala and for matters connected therewith and incidental

thereto. Chapter II of the Act deals with duties and functions

of Police. Section 3 of the Act deals with general duties of

Police. As per Section 3, the Police, as a service functioning

category among the people as part of the administrative

system shall, subject to the Constitution of India and the laws

enacted thereunder, strive in accordance with the law, to

ensure that all persons enjoy the freedoms and rights

available under the law by ensuring peace and order, integrity

of the nation, security of the State and protection of human

rights. Section 4 of the Act deals with functions of Police. As

per Section 4, the Police Officers shall, subject to the

provisions of the Act, perform the functions enumerated in

clauses (a) to (s) of Section 4. As per clause (a), the Police

Officers shall enforce the law impartially; and as per clause

(b), the Police Officers shall protect the life, liberty, property,

human rights and dignity of all persons in accordance with the

law.

W.P.(C). No. 25140 of 2020

6. Lord Denning in 'The Due Process of law' [First

Indian Reprint 1993, Page 102] has described the role of the

Police thus;

"In safeguarding our freedoms, the police play vital role. Society for its defence needs a well-led, well- trained and well-disciplined force or police whom it can trust, and enough of them to be able to prevent crime before it happens, or if it does happen, to detect it and bring the accused to justice.

The police, of course, must act properly. They must obey the rules of right conduct. They must not extort confessions by threats or promises. They must not search a man's house without authority. They must not use more force than the occasion warrants."

7. In Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secretary

[(2014) 2 SCC 532] the Apex Court held that, one of the

responsibilities of the police is protection of life, liberty and

property of citizens. The investigation of offences is one of the

important duties the police has to perform. The aim of

investigation is ultimately to search for truth and bring the

offender to the book. The Apex Court reiterated the said

principle in Ankush Maruti Shinde v. State of

W.P.(C). No. 25140 of 2020

Maharashtra [(2019) 15 SCC 470].

8. The petitioner is seeking police protection to his life

and that of his family members on account of the threat

alleged to have caused by the 5th respondent and his

supporters, in connection with the construction of compound

wall in the property covered by Ext.P1 building permit. As can

be seen from the report of the 3rd respondent Station House

Officer, when the petitioner started the construction of

compound wall, the 5th respondent along with others

prevented the construction alleging that some trees standing

in the property belongs to them. The petitioner filed complaint

before the 3rd respondent Station House Officer, who

summoned the petitioner and the 5th respondent to the police

station. Since it is a civil dispute, both parties were directed to

approach revenue authorities and advised them to re-survey

the disputed property.

9. The document marked as Ext.P1 is the land tax

receipt in respect of the property owned by the petitioner

under Tandaper No.9436 as per which 29 Ares and 12

W.P.(C). No. 25140 of 2020

Sq.Meters of land in Sy.No.486/2 and 7 Ares and 85

Sq.Meters in Sy.No.494/7 of Nellad Village are classified as

'nilam' in revenue records. The aforesaid properties in

Sy.Nos.486/2 and 494/7 of Nellad Village are included in

Ext.P2 building permit.

10. When there is a dispute as to boundary raised at

the instance of the 5th respondent and others, the petitioner

has to approach the competent Civil Court for resolution of

that dispute. If it is on account of any mistake in re-survey

records, the petitioner has to approach the statutory

authorities for correction. In such circumstances, before

resolution of such dispute by the competent forum or

authority, the petitioner cannot seek police protection for

carrying out the construction of compound wall, on the

strength of Ext.P2 building permit. However, in case there is

any threat to law and order in the locality, at the instance of

the 5th respondent and his supporters, the petitioner can

approach the 3rd respondent Station House Officer with a

request for police protection, in which event, the said

W.P.(C). No. 25140 of 2020

respondent shall consider that request and take an

appropriate decision for maintaining law and order in the

locality, taking note of the statutory provisions referred to

hereinbefore and also the law laid down in the decisions

referred to supra.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE das

W.P.(C). No. 25140 of 2020

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 23.10.2020 ISSUED BY NELLAD VILLAGE.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED 22.11.2019.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 9.11.2020 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SITE PLAN APPROVED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT ON 25.10.2019