Jose Sebastian vs The Station House Officer
2024 Latest Caselaw 28835 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 28835 Ker
Judgement Date : 3 October, 2024

Kerala High Court

Jose Sebastian vs The Station House Officer on 3 October, 2024

Author: V.G.Arun

Bench: V.G.Arun

                                                        2024:KER:73419


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

     THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 11TH ASWINA, 1946

                        WP(C) NO. 24770 OF 2024

PETITIONER/S:

          JOSE SEBASTIAN
          AGED 69 YEARS
          S/O. SEBASTIAN, KADALIKATTIL HOUSE, EROOR P.O.,
          ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER,
          MR.RAHUL JOSE, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O. JOSE SEBASTIAN.
          KADALIKATTIL HOUSE, EROOR P.O., ERNAKULAM,
          PIN - 682306.


          BY ADVS.
          K.R.VINOD
          M.S.LETHA
          MAZIN IBRAHIM
          GANESH CHANDRAN S.




RESPONDENT/S:

    1     THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
          MANNUTHY POLICE STATION, MANNUTHY, THRISSUR,
          PIN - 680651

    2     SREE MARIYAMMAN KOVIL KSHETHRA SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHI
          REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, MR.ARUNACHALAM &#64;
          SUNDARAN, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O. UNNIAPPAN, NAYARANGADI
          HOUSE, OLLUKKARA, VELLANIKKARA P.O., THRISSUR,
          PIN - 680654.

    3     MR. SUMESH
          S/O. KARUPPAN UNNIKUTTAN, THE SECRETARY, SREE
          MARIYAMMAN KOVIL KSHETHRA SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHI,
                                                                 2024:KER:73419
WP(C) NO. 24770 OF 2024                  2


             MULAYATHUKAVU HOUSE, OLLUKKARA, VELLANIKKARA P.O.,
             THRISSUR,, PIN - 680654.


             BY ADVS.
             BINOY VASUDEVAN
             SREEJITH SREENATH(K/000508/2018)


             SRI. AJITH VISWANATHAN, GP.


      THIS   WRIT   PETITION   (CIVIL)       HAVING   BEEN   HEARD   FINALLY   ON
03.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                         2024:KER:73419
WP(C) NO. 24770 OF 2024              3



                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner alleges culpable inaction on the part of

the 1st respondent in providing protection to his life and

property from the illegal acts of respondents 2 and 3.

2. The essential facts are as under:-

The petitioner's property is situated by the side of the

old NH 66. Earlier, respondents 2 and 3 had effected a

construction right outside petitioner's property, obstructing his

access to the old National Highway. The petitioner thereupon

approached this Court and Ext.P3 judgment was rendered in

that writ petition, based on the submission of the Standing

Counsel for the National Highway Authority that, respondents

2 and 3 having failed to remove the encroachment even after

issuing notice, proceedings for removing the encroachment

had been initiated by the Authority.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 2024:KER:73419

pursuant to Ext.P3 judgment, the illegal construction was

removed, but it has now become impossible for him to access

the National Highway from his property, since the pathway is

overgrown with shrubs and bushes. It is alleged that the

petitioner's attempts to clear the pathway is being obstructed

by respondents 2 and 3.

4. The learned counsel for the party respondents

submits that the dispute involved is purely civil in nature and

the petitioner's remedy is to approach the competent civil

court.

5. The learned Government Pleader submits that the

complaint submitted by the petitioner is essentially with

respect to a civil dispute and therefore, the police cannot

intervene in the matter.

6. From the arguments advanced and the records

produced, it is apparent that the dispute is essentially civil in 2024:KER:73419

nature. Being so, the petitioner's remedy is to approach the

competent civil court. This Court cannot either grant police

protection to one among the disputing or decide the factual

dispute in a writ petition filed under Article 226.

The writ petition is hence closed, without prejudice to

the petitioner's right to approach the competent civil court

and directing the police to intervene only if the dispute gives

rise to a law and order situation.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE Sru 2024:KER:73419

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24770/2024

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.7698/2016 DATED 22.03.2016.

Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.791/2016 DATED 06.04.2016 OF SRO OLLUKKARA.

Exhibit P3 THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P. (C).NO.41293/2023 DATED 22.03.2024.

Exhibit P4 THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE WILD GROWTH IN THE LANDED PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER.