Kerala High Court
A.K.Ashraf vs The State Of Kerala on 4 April, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 2522 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
A.K.ASHRAF, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O. ABDULLA KUNJU,
RESIDING AT PUTHAN PURAYIL HOUSE,
ARAFA NAGAR- 49, ERAVIPURAM,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691011
BY ADVS.
S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM)
K.VIJAYAN
NAMITHA RAJESH
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
HOME AFFAIRS, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ERAVIPURAM, KOLLAM,
PIN - 691011
3 THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOLLAM CITY, KOLLAM,
PIN - 691001
4 SHIDHU M.S., AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. MADHU M.S,
RESIDING AT M.S.NIVAS, KOTTAKUPURAM, CLAPANA P.O.,
VALLIKAVU, KOLLAM, PIN - 690525
5 NOUSHAD, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. HAMEED, RESIDING AT
MAHIMANZIL, ZAMZAM NAGAR-71, ERAVIPURAM.P.O.,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691011
BY ADVS.
B N HASKAR
B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN(K/37/1994)
SRI P M SHAMEER-GP
SRI B K GOPALAKRISHNAN-R4
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 2522/24
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner says that he is an activist as also the President
of an Association, living with three children and wife. He concedes
that his elder son has involved himself in certain fiscal transactions
with the party respondents, for which he is not responsible at all;
but that the said respondents are now forcing him to assign his
property in their favour, or to persons of their choice, threatening
him that if he does not do so, he and his family will be done away
with. He says that, therefore, he preferred Ext.P1 complaint before
the 2nd respondent - Station House Officer, but that no action has
been taken thereon until now; thus constraining him to approach
this Court through this Writ Petition.
2. The afore submissions of Sri.S.Sreekumar - learned
counsel for the petitioner, were vehemently controverted by
Sri.Gopalakrishnan - learned counsel for the party respondents,
saying that his clients have neither threatened or intimidated the
petitioner at any point of time, nor have they made any demand as
alleged afore. He submitted that his clients have taken legal action
against the petitioner's son and they also suspect that the petitioner
is also involved in the transaction, for which, they only intend to
pursue necessary remedies as permitted in law. He concluded his
submissions saying that the intent of the petitioner is to frustrate
all such remedies of his clients and therefore, prayed that this Writ
Petition be dismissed.
3. Sri.P.M.Shameer - learned Government Pleader, affirmed
that there are no law and order issues as far as the petitioner is
concerned and that he and his family are not under any threat
from the party respondents. He added that there appears to be
certain disputes between the petitioner's son and the party
respondents, but that these are not matters which have degenerated
into any law and order issue as alleged. He undertook that, in case
the petitioner requires any assistance in future, it shall be made
available to him on proper request.
Taking note of the afore submissions and recording the afore
undertakings of the learned Government Pleader, I dispose of this
Writ Petition, leaving liberty to the petitioner to approach the 2 nd
respondent - Station House Officer for protection, if and when any
requirement for such arises; in which event, the said Authority will
look into the same and take necessary action without any avoidable
delay.
Sd/-
RR DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2522/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN TO THE
2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.01.2024
