Kerala High Court
Abdul Razak vs State Of Kerala on 5 April, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 7543 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
ABDUL RAZAK
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O MOIDUNNI, MANGALASSERIYIL HOUSE, PERUMBILAVU PO
OTTAPILAVU THRISSUR. ALSO RESIDING IN HOUSE NO. 311
CHAITHANYA COOPERATIVE BUILDING HOUSING SOCIETY CHANDRANAGAR
POST PALAKAD, PIN - 680519
BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
V.VINAY
M.S.ANEER
PRERITH PHILIP JOSEPH
ANILKUMAR C.R.
K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATE POLICE CHIEF
OFFICE OF THE STATE POLICE CHIEF, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010
3 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
THRISSUR CITY, RAMAVARMAPURAM THRISSUR KERALA, PIN - 680631
4 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KUNNUMKULAM POLICE STATION, PIN - 680503
5 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PALAKKAD KASABA POLICE STATION, PIN - 678622
6 ABDULLAH
AGED 55 YEARS
VIRUTHIYIL, EDAKKARA DESOM, KADIKKADU AMSHAM, CHAVAKKADU
THALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT., PIN - 680518
7 FATHIMA
AGED 48 YEARS
W/O ABDHULLA VIRUTHIYIL, EDAKKARA DESOM, KADIKKADU AMSHAM,
CHAVAKKADU THALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT., PIN - 680518
8 FAVAZ,
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O ABDHULLA VIRUTHIYIL, EDAKKARA DESOM, KADIKKADU AMSHAM,
WP(C) NO. 7543 OF 2024
2
CHAVAKKADU THALUK THRISSUR DISTRICT., PIN - 680518
9 RASHEED @ RASHEED VADAKKANCHERY
S/O MUHAMMED ALI PARUTHIPRAKARANCHERRY HOUSE, VADAKKANCHERY.
THRISSUR., PIN - 678683
10 DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL,
THRISSUR RANGE. PALLIMOOLA RAMAVARMAPURAM THRISSUR, PIN -
680010
BY ADV G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
SRI.P.M. SHAMEER - GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.04.2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 7543 OF 2024
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner says that some disputes arose between him
and the party respondents with respect to the sale of a property
owned by him and that it deteriorated to such extent that the
latter even threatened and intimidated him, saying that his
daughter's marriage scheduled on 03.03.2024 would be disrupted.
He says that he, therefore, preferred Ext.P3 before the fourth
respondent - Station House Officer, seeking protection for the lives
of himself and his family and that of his property, as also for the
conduct of the marriage on 03.03.2024; but that since no action
was taken thereon, he has been constrained to approach this Court
through this writ petition.
2. Pertinently, on 01.03.2024, when this matter was
considered by another bench of this Court, the following interim
had been issued:
"Sri. Sreekumar Chellur enters appearance for the
party respondents and seeks an adjournment to file
counter.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
points out the marriage of the daughter of the
petitioner is scheduled to be held on 3.03.2024. He
submits that the party respondents have threatened
that they would disrupt the function. The learned
counsel refers to Exhibit P2 crime and submitted that
he has received information that the family members
of the petitioner would be harmed.
3. Having considered the submissions advanced,
there will be a direction to the respondents 3 to 5 to
ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioner or his
family members by the respondents 6 to 9. The
WP(C) NO. 7543 OF 2024
respondents 3 to 5 is directed to grant necessary
assistance to the petitioner and ensure that the
conduct of the marriage of the daughter of the
petitioner to be held on 3.3.2024 at the Telcon
International Convention Center, Kechery, Thrissur is
conducted peacefully and without any disruption by
the party respondents or their men "
3. Today, the learned Government Pleader -
Sri.P.M.Shameer submits that the marriage of the daughter of the
petitioner has concluded peacefully and that the police have taken
steps to ensure that the lives and properties of the petitioner and
that of his family are completely and adequately protected. He
added that the respondents have also undertaken before the Police
that they will not cause any act in violation of law.
4. Sri.Neeraj M.S, learned counsel appearing for
respondents 6 to 9, submitted that the imputations made against
his clients by the petitioner are wholly untrue and that they have
not and do not intent to cause him any threat or intimidation, as
alleged. He thus, prayed that this writ petition against his clients
be dismissed.
5. The afore undertakings of the learned Government
Pleader and the counsel for respondents 6 to 9 render it
perspicuous that the petitioner does not have to harbour any
apprehension as averred by him, particularly when the marriage of
his daughter has been completed without any event.
WP(C) NO. 7543 OF 2024
In the afore circumstances, confirming the interim order
afore extracted, I dispose of this writ petition; with a consequential
direction to the fourth respondent to ensure that law and order is
maintained in the area, without the parties being allowed to take
law into their own hands, or cause any threat or intimidation to
each other.
This writ petition is thus ordered.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
rp
WP(C) NO. 7543 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7543/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN OS. NO. 34/2022
DATED 13.12.2023
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO 381/2022 DATED 12.03.2022 OF
KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT RECEIPT DATED 14.06.2022
ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE WEDDING INVITATION CARD
Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.02.2024 SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.02.2024 SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 21.02.2024 SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20.02.2024 SUBMITTED TO
THE 5TH RESPONDENT ALONG WITH RECEIPT
Exhibit P9 A COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH
RESPONDENT DATED 29-02-2024
