Kerala High Court
Shabeer Khalid vs State Of Kerala on 3 June, 2025
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
2025:KER:38910
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 3266 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
SHABEER KHALID
AGED 49 YEARS
R V NIVAS, EAST NADA,
GURUVAYOOR P O, CHAVAKKAD,
THRISSUR, KERALA, PIN - 680101
BY ADV SHRI.ADIL.M.H
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
GURUVAYUR TEMPLE POLICE STATION
STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
GURUVAYUR TEMPLE POLICE STATION,
MELPATHUR ROAD, NEAR GURUVAYUR TEMPLE,
SOUTH NADA, EAST NADA, THRISSUR,
GURUVAYUR, KERALA, PIN - 680101
2025:KER:38910
WP(C) No.3266 of 2025
2
3 NOUSHAD,
AGED 51 YEARS
RAYAMARAKKAR HOUSE, GURUVAYUR AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD TALUK, PIN-680 506.
(ADDRESS OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT IS CORRECTED AS
"R.V.NOUSHAD, S/O HAMSA, RAYAMARAKKAR VEETIL,
KUNNAMKULAM TALUK, CHIRAMANANGAD VILLAGE,
CHIRAMANANGAD DESOM, CHIRAMANANGAD P.O.,
PIN: 680 604" AS PER THE ORDER DATED 21.02.2025
IN I.A.NO.1/2025 IN WP(C) NO.3266/2025)
BY ADV.
SRI. RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 03.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:38910
WP(C) No.3266 of 2025
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2025
The petitioner, being the son and Power of Attorney
holder of his parents, seeks intervention in a matter of
harassment and threat faced by his parents, who are aged 80
and 68 years, respectively. Both parents suffer from serious
health issues due to their advanced age, contends the
petitioner.
2. The petitioner's father is the joint owner of an
ancestral property located in Chavakkad Taluk, Iringapram
Village, Thiruvenkidam Desom. OS No.1129/2004 was filed
by the petitioner's father before the Munsiff's Court,
Chavakkad which ruled in his favour on 05.11.2011 ordering
partition of the property. However, due to threats, coercion
2025:KER:38910
and the influence of the 3 rd respondent, who is the son of the
petitioner's father's brother, the partition has not been
executed till date. The 3rd respondent has been persistently
harassing the petitioner's parents and attempting to unlawfully
claim the joint ancestral property. The 3rd respondent has filed
multiple false complaints and Civil Suits against the
petitioner's parents to achieve this goal. The 3 rd respondent's
aggressive behaviour has also extended to his own siblings,
who have lodged complaints against him for threats and
assaults related to the property disputes.
3. Despite the 3rd respondent's behaviour, the
petitioner's parents have sought to maintain peace. They,
along with the other joint holders, even agreed to sell parts of
an old house and trees on the ancestral property for
₹2,50,000 at the request of the 3rd respondent. An
2025:KER:38910
agreement was executed and the entire amount was handed
over to the 3rd respondent. However, the 3rd respondent later
filed a false complaint with the police alleging theft by the
petitioner's parents.
4. Upon investigation, the police found the
complaint to be baseless and aimed solely at defaming and
harassing them. The petitioner's father has expressed his
willingness to sell his share of the property at a fair value to
the 3rd respondent, but the latter insists on acquiring it without
any payment, causing serious hardship and loss to the
petitioner's family. Numerous criminal and civil cases have
been filed against the 3rd respondent.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing
respondents 1 and 2. Though notice was issued to the
2025:KER:38910
3rd respondent, there is no appearance for the 3rd respondent.
6. The allegation of the petitioner is that the 3 rd
respondent is harassing the petitioner and propagating
malicious information about the parents of the petitioner as
the 3rd respondent wants family property to be given him free
of cost. The petitioner's parents are ready to sell it to the 3 rd
respondent for a reasonable price. But the 3 rd respondent
wants it free of cost.
7. Be that as it may, the 3rd respondent has not
appeared in the Court in spite of service of notice. In the facts
of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner and his parents
should be given necessary protection if the situation so
warrants.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing
the 2nd respondent that if the petitioner or his parents bring to
2025:KER:38910
the notice of the police any complaint involving criminal
offence, the 2nd respondent shall look into the matter and take
appropriate action thereon in accordance with law.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
spk
2025:KER:38910
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3266/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 A POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED BY THE
PETITIONER'S PARENTS ON 04/01/2025 IS
PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS
EXHIBIT-P1
Exhibit-P2 THE AADHAAR CARDS OF THE PETITIONER'S
PARENTS ARE PRODUCED HEREWITH AND
MARKED AS EXHIBIT-P2.
Exhibit-P3 THE MEDICAL RECORDS DETAILING THE
HEALTH CONDITION OF THE PETITIONER'S
FATHER ARE PRODUCED HEREWITH AND
MARKED AS EXHIBIT-P3.
Exhibit-P4 THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED FOR STIPULATING
EQUAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE SOLD
PROPERTIES IN ANCESTRAL PROPERTY AMONG
THE SHARE HOLDERS IS PRODUCED HEREWITH
AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT-P4.
Exhibit-P5 AN ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE FOR THE
PROPERTY, DATED 23/10/2024 IS PRODUCED
HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT-P5.
Exhibit-P6 A COPY OF THE COMPLAINT AND ITS
RECEIPT ARE PRODUCED HEREWITH AND
MARKED AS EXHIBIT-P6.
Exhibit-P7 A COPY OF THE EMAIL COMPLAINT
SUBMITTED TO THRISSUR DISTRICT POLICE
CHIEF IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED
AS EXHIBIT-P7.
