IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 15085 of 2008(U)
1. SHAREEFA, AGED 70 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. A.K.NAUSHAD, S/O.LATE KHADER PILLAI,
3. RAMLA W/O.A.K.NAZER,
Vs
1. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
... Respondent
2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
4. ABDUL KAREEM, S/O.LATE HASSAN,
5. MUHAMMED ALI, S/O.LATE HASSAN,
6. ABDUL MAJEED, S/O.LATE HASSAN,
7. ABDUL SALAM, S/O.LATE HASSAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.KKM.SHERIF
For Respondent :SRI.JOSEPH A.VADAKKEL
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :24/06/2008
O R D E R
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR &
M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
-----------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO.15085 OF 2008-U
-----------------------------------------
Dated 24th June, 2008.
JUDGMENT
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The 1st petitioner is the mother of the 2nd petitioner and the 3rd
petitioner is the wife of her another son Mr.A.K.Nazer. The petitioners and
respondent 4 to 7 are owners of neighbouring properties. The respondents 4
to 7 are proceeding with a construction in their property, allegedly
encroaching into the property of the petitioners. Therefore, they moved the
civil court, seeking appropriate reliefs. Though, initially, there was an
interim order in favour of the petitioners, later, it was vacated. Because of
the ill-will created by the motion made by the petitioners before the civil
court, the respondents 4 to 7 are threatening and harassing them. They have
also threatened to damage the business premises of the 3rd petitioner’s
husband Mr.A.K.Nazer, who is working abroad. Feeling aggrieved by the
above actions of the said respondents, the petitioners have preferred Exts.P2
and P2(a) representations before the C.I of Police, Kalamassery and S.I of
WPC 15085/08 2
Police, Kalamassery respectively. Alleging that the police did not take any
effective action, this Writ Petition is filed, seeking appropriate reliefs.
2. The respondents 4 to 7 have filed a counter affidavit, denying the
allegations of the petitioners. According to the said respondents, they are
proceeding with the construction in their property only. The interim order
passed by the civil court was vacated after hearing both sides. The
petitioners are in the habit of complaining against the respondents before
various authorities. Earlier,a writ petition was attempted before this Court,
seeking police protection. The same was disposed of by Ext.R6A
judgment, ordering to maintain law and order. The respondents 4 to 7
submit that they have no intention whatsoever to physically harm the
petitioners or Mr.A.K.Nazer, the son of the 1st petitioner, who is working
abroad or cause damages to his business establishment.
3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that
the allegations of the petitioners are unfounded. Merely on the basis of an
apprehension, this petition for police protection has been filed, it is
submitted. At present, there is no law and order problem, warranting
interference by the police.. There are civil disputes between the petitioners
and respondents 4 to 7. The police have no role to play in them, it is
submitted.
WPC 15085/08 3
4. We record the submission of respondents 4 to 7 that they have no
plans to attack the petitioners or Mr.A.K.Nazer, the son of the 1st petitioner
or his business establishment. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
Nm/