Kerala High Court
Sathi Rajendran vs District Police Chief on 23 May, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 15723 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 SATHI RAJENDRAN, AGED 56 YEARS, W/O. RAJENDRAN
SREESIVAM VENGARA, THODIYOOR KOLLAM, PIN - 690518
2 RAJENDRAN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. KUNJIKRISHNAN SREESIVAM
VENGARA, THODIYOOR KOLLAM, PIN - 690518
SADCHITH.P.KURUP
C.P.ANIL RAJ
SIVA SURESH
ATHIRA VIJAYAN
B.SREEDEVI
RESPONDENTS:
1 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF LINK ROAD,
ASRAMAM KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM,
PIN - 690518
3 SURESH, ASHA BHAVAN THODIYOOR, KOLLAM, PIN - 690518
4 BEENA, W/O. SURESH ASHA BHAVAN THODIYOOR,
KOLLAM, PIN - 690518
5 SATHEENDRAN
ASHA BHAVAN THODIYOOR, KOLLAM, PIN - 690518
SMT.REKHA C.NAIR - SR.GP.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 15723 OF 2024
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioners concede that they have borrowed gold
worth Rs.8,50,000/- from M/s.Sayan Gold, Karunagappally,
where the fourth respondent is working and say that this was
promised to be paid off in installments. They explain that, due to
certain reasons, they were unable to do so and that the third
respondent, who is the husband of the fourth respondent,
attacked them brutally, and that they have now been meted out
with continuous threats and intimidation, saying that they have
connection with certain political parties which was, in fact,
subsequently demonstrated on 31.01.2024, when they were
again attacked in front of the office of the said party office.
2. The petitioners allege that they were physically attacked,
verbally abused and damage was caused to the residence and its
facilities; thus constraining the 1 st petitioner to approach the 2nd
respondent with Ext.P3 request for protection. They have
produced Ext.P2 in substantiation and say that the gravity of the
threat being faced by them is so high, that it is now impossible
for them to live without protection; and assert that this is
manifest from Ext.P5 FIR. They allege that, however, since no
further action has been taken by the Police, they have been
constrained to approach this Court through this writ petition.
WP(C) NO. 15723 OF 2024
3. I notice from the files that, even though service of
summons from this Court has been validly completed on
respondents 3 and 4, they have chosen not to be present in
person or to be represented through counsel; inferentially
guiding me to the impression that they have nothing to offer in
opposition to the various reliefs sought for in this writ petition.
4. Smt.Rekha C.Nair - learned Senior Government Pleader,
submitted that the Police have already taken cognizance of
petitioner's complaint and are offering them adequate
protection. She added that the fifth respondent is not anywhere
in the vicinity and therefore, that no further order against him
may be necessary.
5. I have no doubt that the Police are obligated to protect
the lives and properties of citizens and this includes that of the
petitioners also. The disputes between the parties are not
something into which the Police can intervene, but they cannot
allow them to degenerate into a law and order issue, nor to a
situation where the parties take law into their own hands.
6. In the afore perspective, I allow this writ petition and
direct the second respondent to afford adequate and effective
protection to the lives and properties of the petitioners and
WP(C) NO. 15723 OF 2024
ensure that they are kept away from any threat from the party
respondents or their men. The said Officer will also ensure that
law and order is maintained and that no one is allowed to
commit any act which is in violation of peace.
The afore direction shall be overseen by the first
respondent - District Police Chief.
That said, it is needless to say that the remedies of
respondents 3 to 5 against the petitioners, if any, are fully left
open; and the merits of the internecine disputes, if any, as also
the rival contentions, are left undecided.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
stu
WP(C) NO. 15723 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15723/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE DATED 29.9.2022
ISSUED BY THE THODIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT IN
THE NAME OF THE 1ST PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
06.01.2024 FILED BEFORE THE CITY POLICE
COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM DISTRICT
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 1.2.2024
FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 1.2.2024
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO. 248/2024 DATED
09.02.2024 OF KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION
