CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(2011) 04 KL CK 0069

Abdul Kareem vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police, The Circle Inspector of Police, The Sub Inspector of Police and Jyothi

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 19 April 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
S. Siri Jagan, J · M.L. Joseph Francis, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 11234 of 2011 (D)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 358 words

S. Siri Jagan, J.—The Petitioner is a 63 year old man residing along with his wife, who is stated to be a heart patient. His son and his family are also residing with the Petitioner. The son had some business transactions with the 4th Respondent. In the name of recovering amounts from the son, the 4th Respondent is threatening the life of the Petitioner and his family, it is submitted. The Petitioner seeks the following relief''s:

(i) Issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing Respondents 2 and 3 to provide adequate police protection to the life of the Petitioner and his family members from the illegal action of the 4th Respondent and his henchmen forthwith.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing the 3rd Respondent to dispose of Ext.P1 representation filed by the Petitioner, forthwith.

(iii) To issue such other relief''s as this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case.

2.

The 4th Respondent appears through counsel and submits that the Petitioner owes money to the 4th Respondent. But, no document to prove the same is produced before us. He also submits that apart from trying to recover the money from the Petitioner, the 4th Respondent has no intention to harm the Petitioner or his family. He apprehends that if an order of police protection is granted, the same may be used to prevent the 4th Respondent from recovering the money due to the 4th Respondent.

3.

Having heard both sides, we dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:

The undertaking of the 4th Respondent that he will not do anything to harm the Petitioner or his family members is recorded. If contrary to the said undertaking, the 4th Respondent does anything to harm the Petitioner or his family, Respondents 1 to 3 shall promptly take action, on a complaint from the Petitioner. However, if there is any civil dispute between the Petitioner and the 4th Respondent or the Petitioner''s son and the 4th Respondent, Respondents 1 to 3 shall not interfere in the same.