IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 23757 of 2009(L)
1. SARATH CHANDRAN, SASTHYALAYATHIL,
... Petitioner
2. HARILAL KRISHNAN, THAYYIL KANDASSERIL,
3. GEORGE C.VARGHESE, CHENNOTH,
4. R.SHIBU, CHELLIKANDATHIL,
5. KARUNAKARAN, UNNI NIVAS,
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AROOR.
6. SHAILENDRAN, S/O.KUNJAPPI, PADATHRA,
For Petitioner :SRI.N.RAGHURAJ
For Respondent :SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Dated :24/08/2009
O R D E R
KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO. 23757 OF 2009
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of August, 2009
JUDGMENT
Kurian Joseph, J.
The Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers:
i. to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or
such other writ, order or direction,
commanding respondents 2 to 5 to afford
adequate and meaningful protection to the
petitioners and their employees to conduct
T.S. No. 24/09-10 in Building No.XIII/274 in
Sy. No. 389/11/1/2 of Kuthiyathode Village
without any obstruction from the 6th
respondent or his followers;
ii. to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or
such other writ, order or direction, directing
the police to afford sufficient protection to the
life and property of petitioners and their
workers attached to T.S. No.24/09-10 while
conducting the said toddy shop in its
scheduled premises.
2. The 6th respondent has filed a counter affidavit. In paragraph 3 of
the counter affidavit, it is stated as follows:
W.P.(C)NO.23757/2009 2
“It is true that the 6th respondent and
others had raised objections before the Excise
authorities on the ground that the location of
the shop is within the prohibited distance.
Though the petitioners were afforded ample
opportunities to locate an unobjectionable site,
they are bent upon disturbing the 6th respondent
and others by insisting the running of the Toddy
shop at the disputed place. Naturally therefore,
there is opposition. However, no Law and
Order situation exists. Nor is there any
unlawful obstruction caused by the 6th
respondent and others at any time. The alleged
threat etc., are totally false. The attempt of the
petitioners is to silence any objection to the
unauthorized running of a shop, licence to
which was obtained at a time when there was a
stay from this Hon’ble Court. Since there is no
law and order situation there had been no failure
on the part of the police. This respondent and
other peace loving citizens of the locality have
every right to object to the running of the Toddy
shop, which will pose danger to the women-folk
for a peaceful living in the area. Apart from
raising such objections there is no conduct that
can be called culpable, illegal or objectionable
from the side of the 6th respondent or others.”
The above submissions are recorded. It is made clear that the 6th
respondent shall not take law in his hands so as to interfere with the
lawful conduct of the toddy shop.
Therefore, recording the submissions as extracted above and with
the above clarification, the Writ Petition is disposed of , making it clear
W.P.(C)NO.23757/2009 3
that in case there is any unlawful obstruction on the part of the 6th
respondent or his henchmen, it will be open to the petitioners to bring the
same to the notice of respondents 4 and 5, in which case appropriate
action, in accordance with law, will be taken by the police to ensure that
law and order is maintained.
(KURIAN JOSEPH)
JUDGE
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR)
JUDGE
sp/
W.P.(C)NO.23757/2009 4
KURIAN JOSEPH
&
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
W.P.(C)NO.23757/2009
JUDGMENT
25th August, 2009