High Court Kerala High Court

K.R.Kunjukrishna Pillai vs State Of Kerala on 22 May, 2009

Kerala High Court
K.R.Kunjukrishna Pillai vs State Of Kerala on 22 May, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 6427 of 2009(W)


1. K.R.KUNJUKRISHNA PILLAI, AGED 66 YRS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,KOLLAM.

3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SASTHAM

4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

5. S.SURESH, AGED 45 YEARS, ALINTE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.AJAYA KUMAR. G

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.V.DILEEP

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN

 Dated :22/05/2009

 O R D E R
                     P.R. RAMAN & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ.
                 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                             W.P.(C) No. 6427 of 2009
                    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                      Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2009.

                                        JUDGMENT

Raman, J,

Petitioner is a senior citizen. He is residing in the address

shown along with his wife and daughter. The allegation is that the fifth

respondent, his neighbour, is attempting to trespass into the sarpakavu

belonging to the petitioner’s family, and on such occasion petitioner

interfered, and that created enemity between the petitioner and the fifth

respondent. As a result of such enemity, it is alleged that the fifth

respondent came to the house of the petitioner and shouted at him and

abused them with obscene language and threatened to cause physical

harm. Further he also set fire on the logs kept in the property of the

petitioner. The fire spread in an alarming rate and engulfed the entire

area. Therefore, the petitioner had to run away and make police

complaint. Finding that such complaints did not yield any result, he

approached this court for police protection.

2. The fifth respondent entered appearance through

counsel. Counsel appearing for the fifth respondent denied all the

WPC. 6427/2009. 2

allegations aforesaid made by the petitioner. He being the Vice President of

the Panchayat and a public man has only enquired about the incident that

had happened in the property of the petitioner and did not make any assault

or abuse the petitioner nor has he done anything to set fire the logs kept in

the property of the petitioner.

3. It is not necessary for us in this writ petition to find out the

truth or genuineness of the allegations and counter allegations made by the

parties, since when a complaint is received by the police, it is for them to

investigate into the complaint, and if found true, to proceed further in

accordance with law. However, the fact that there was a fire incident cannot

be disputed. If so, necessarily, to keep peace and to maintain law and order,

protection has to be afforded. In that view, this court, by an interim order

made on 27.2.2009, directed the police to see that law and order is

maintained and the lives of the parties are not endangered. Pursuant to such

direction, no further incident is reported. In the above circumstances, the

order made by this court on 27.2.2009 is made absolute. No other orders are

called for.

WPC. 6427/2009. 3

The writ petition is closed.

P.R. Raman,
Judge

P. Bhavadasan,
Judge

sb.