Blesson Abrham vs The District Police Chief
2021 Latest Caselaw 601 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

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

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


PETITIONERS:

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

      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

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

RESPONDENTS:

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

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

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

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


               SRI PP THAJUDEEN GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD        ON
07.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.26477 OF 2020               2




                                 JUDGMENT

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.

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

respondent to ensure that law and order is maintained.

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

appears.

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

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

Pleader.

5. 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.

6. 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

2nd respondent shall enquire about the complaint and ascertain its

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

in accordance with law.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

JUDGE NS

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

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

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

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

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

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

NIL