AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R. Basant, J.—The Petitioner has come to this Court seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution to Respondents 1 to 3-all police officials, to afford protection to the Petitioner against contumacious, culpable and violent acts that he apprehends from the 4th Respondent.
The 4th Respondent is none other than the son-in-law of the Petitioner i.e., the daughter''s husband. It appears that there are disputes between the Petitioner and the 4th Respondent. The relationship between the Petitioner''s daughter and the 4th Respondent is strained. A complaint was filed u/s 498A IPC before the police and a crime has been registered. There are other proceedings also pending before the matrimonial court. According to the Petitioner, the 4th Respondent is now turning against the Petitioner to compel him to withdraw the cases initiated by the Petitioner''s daughter against the 4th Respondent. It is in this context that he has come to this Court seeking directions under Article 226 of the Constitution.
The 4th Respondent has entered appearance through counsel. A counter affidavit has been filed. The learned Counsel submits that the boot is on the other leg and it is actually the Petitioner who is trying to assault and indulge in culpable and violent conduct against the 4th Respondent. According to the 4th Respondent, long before the present controversies arose, the Petitioner and his two sons had attacked the 4th Respondent. In respect of that an earlier crime has been registered by the police. As counter blast against that crime, subsequent allegations are being made frequently by the Petitioner and her daughter. There is absolutely no necessity to issue any directions under Article 226 of the Constitution. The 4th Respondent shall not indulge in any contumacious or culpable act against the Petitioner or his daughter. This undertaking may be accepted and the proceedings may be closed. It may be ensured that the 4th Respondent is not attacked by the Petitioner.
We turned to the learned Government Pleader for submissions. The learned Government Pleader submits that in the perception of the police officials, there is no threat whatsoever to the life or person of the Petitioner. It is true that two crimes have been registered and matrimonial proceedings are pending between the 4th Respondent and his wife i.e., the daughter of the Petitioner. There is no necessity to issue any directions under Article 226 of the Constitution. The police shall ensure that any such attempt to interfere with the law and order situation by the Petitioner attacking the 4th Respondent or the 4th Respondent attacking the Petitioner is frustrated.
We have considered all the relevant inputs. We take note of the submissions of the learned Government Pleader. We are satisfied that the undertaking of the learned Government Pleader on behalf of Respondents 1 and 2 can be recorded and proceedings can be closed.
In the result:
(a) This writ petition is allowed.
(b) We accept the submission of the learned Government
Pleader that the police shall intervene if there be any threat against the Petitioner from the 4th Respondent or against the 4th Respondent by the Petitioner. Either can complain to the police in the event of any such contumacious and culpable acts on the part of the other.
Accepting the said submissions of the learned Government Pleader, no further directions are issued under Article 226 of the Constitution.