Kerala High Court
Rajeena Ibrahim Kutty vs The Station House Officer on 6 June, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 14976 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 RAJEENA IBRAHIM KUTTY
AGED 40 YEARS
W/O IBRAHIM KUTTY, KIZHAKKETHIL HOUSE, CHERAMANANGAD P.O,
THRISSUR - 680604, REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY,
SUDHEER K.S, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O SUDHAKARAN,
KANDIRITHYHOUSE,MARATHAMKODE P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN
- 680604
2 SUDHEER K.S
AGED 46 YEARS
S/O SUDHAKARAN, KANDIRITHY HOUSE, MARATHAMKODE P.O,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680604
BY ADVS.
M.J.SHINSA MOLE
P.YEMUNA
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
NILAMBUR POLICE STATION, NILAMBUR MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 679329
2 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
NILAMBUR POLICE STATION, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 679329
3 GOPALAKRISHNAN P. @ UNNI
AGED 52 YEARS
S/O CHARU NAIR, PALOLY, MANALODY, NILAMBUR, MALAPURAM,
KERALA, PIN - 679329
4 DINESH M
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O KUTTAN M, MAYANNOOR HOUSE, ARUVAKODE, KSRTC BUS
STATION, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679329
5 C.K PHILIP
AGED 55 YEARS
KAVOOR HOUSE, NEAR COURT, KODATHIPADY ROAD, MALAPPURAM,
KERALA, PIN - 679329
WP(C) NO. 14976 OF 2024
2
BY ADVS.
MATHEW kURIAKOSE
T.G.SUNIL (PERUMBAVOOR)(K/611/2007)
J.KRISHNAKUMAR (ADOOR)(K/731/2011)
C.N.PRAKASH(K/000729/2017)
MONI GEORGE(K/1593/2019)
SHAJI P.K.(K/1043/2021)
ARUN.S.(K/2014/2023)
PREETHU JAGATHY(K/2047/2023)
SMT.REKHA C.NAIR, SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 14976 OF 2024
3
JUDGMENT
The 1st petitioner says that she is the owner
of an extent of land in Nilambur, which does not
have any compound wall as of now. She says that
this has emboldened the neighbours, as also the
party respondents, to dump waste into it; and
therefore, that she has now decided to construct
a compound wall around it. She says that,
however, even when she attempts to clean the
property, she is obstructed by the party
respondents; and therefore, that she fears that
she and her employees would be attacked or even
done away with, once she attempts to construct
compound wall.
2. The petitioner says that, she,
therefore, preferred Ext.P5 complaint before the
1st respondent - Station House Officer, seeking
WP(C) NO. 14976 OF 2024
protection, but that it has not been afforded to
her; thus forcing her to approach this Court
through this Writ Petition.
3. In response to the afore submissions of
Sri.M.J.Shinsa Mole - learned counsel for the
petitioners, Sri.Mathew Kuriakose - learned
counsel appearing for the party respondents,
submitted that, it is evident from the afore
assertions that the reliefs sought for are
speculative and conjectural. He explained that
this is because, when the 1st petitioner says
that she has already cleaned the property and
that she intends to construct compound wall in
future, it really relates to something which is
intended, but for which, no relevant and
necessary permissions have been yet obtained.
He, however, added that his clients have not and
do not intend to cause any threat or
WP(C) NO. 14976 OF 2024
intimidation to the petitioners, as alleged; but
sought liberty for them to approach the
competent Forums/Courts, in the event the
petitioner' attempts to construct a compound
wall, without following the statutory
requirements.
4. Smt.Rekha C.Nair - learned Senior
Government Pleader, affirmed that the
petitioners have already been granted necessary
protection to clean 1st petitioner's property and
that this is manifest from the fact that there
have been no untoward incidents. She submitted
that the police, however, cannot supervise the
construction of the compound wall, though they
can offer requisite protection, if the
petitioners obtain the necessary consents and
clearances from the Authorities concerned.
5. I have no doubt that the afore stand of
WP(C) NO. 14976 OF 2024
the police is the most apposite because, they
are only expected to protect the lives and
properties of the parties, as in the case of any
other citizens.
In the afore perspective, I allow this Writ
Petition and direct the 2nd respondent to ensure
that the lives of the petitioners, as also that
of the party respondents, are adequately
protected against each other; and are none of
them commit any action, which is in violation of
law
I record the submissions of the learned
counsel for the petitioners that her clients
have already cleaned the property, but intends
to construct the compound wall in future,
subject to all licences and permissions, as are
required, being obtained.
Needless to say, the police will ensure that
WP(C) NO. 14976 OF 2024
law and order is always maintained and that
there is no breach of peace, whatever be the
provocation that the petitioners and the parties
may have against each other. This shall be
ensured on a continual basis.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
SAS
WP(C) NO. 14976 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14976/2024
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF DOC.NO.3296/ 2022 SRO NILAMBUR,
DATED 23-05-2022
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE
VILLAGE OFFICER, NILAMBUR, DATED 24-01-2024
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED
BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, NILAMBUR, DATED 29-03-
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 15-
12-2023
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT MADE BY THE
PETITIONER, DATED 4-3-2024
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE
NILAMBUR POLICE STATION
