Salahuddin Nalakath vs Sub Inspector Of Police on 18 January, 2011

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 914 of 2011(L)


1. SALAHUDDIN NALAKATH, SON OF MOHAMMED,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. A.ABDULLA, SON OF KUNHAMMED,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :18/01/2011

 O R D E R
           R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
                     ***********************
                     W.P(C) No.914 of 2011
                   *****************************
            Dated this the 18th day of January, 2011

                           JUDGMENT

BASANT, J.

The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition

under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking issue of directions

to respondents 1 to 5 to afford police protection for the

petitioner against the highhanded, violent and culpable acts on

the part of the 2nd respondent, with whom the petitioner was

associated in a business.

2. The matter was admitted on 11.01.11 and was posted

to this day.

3. The 2nd respondent has been served. No counter

affidavit or objection has been filed. The learned Government

Pleader after taking instructions from the 1st respondent submits

that in the perception of the 1st respondent, there is no threat

now to the life or person of the petitioner.

4. It appears that there are some disputes between the

petitioner and the 2nd respondent, who were associates in their

business. There have been allegations and counter allegations.

At any rate, the 1st respondent does not perceive any threat to

W.P(C) No.914 of 2011 2

the life or person of the petitioner at the hands of the 2nd

respondent. However, the learned Government Pleader submits

that if there be any allegations of threat or risk to the life and

person of the petitioner, the petitioner shall be at liberty to

complain to the police, whereupon the police shall take

necessary action to afford protection to the petitioner.

5. We are satisfied, in these circumstances, that no

specific directions need be issued to the 1st respondent. The 1st

respondent, we clarify, shall not and need not interfere in the

civil dispute between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. We

accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader on

behalf of the 1st respondent and allow this petition in part to the

above extent.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

(K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE)

rtr/