AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Abdul Rehim, J.—The 2nd Petitioner is the father of the first Petitioner. The first Petitioner is conducting a ''Margin Free Market'' at Chathannoor. Allegation is that the 5th Respondent had purchased some articles from the shop of the 1st Petitioner and he refused to make payment of the value there of. When questioned, the 5th Respondent abused the Petitioner and threw the articles in the shop, by raising threat to the effect that he will finish off the first Petitioner. On the date of the above said incident at about 9.P.M. the 5th Respondent came to the medical shop run by the 2nd Petitioner and created a seen. It is alleged that the 2nd Petitioner was attacked and he had caused damage to the medical shop. According to the Petitioners, in spite of complaint lodged to the 4th Respondent about the above said incidents, no case was registered against the 5th Respondent, presumably due to the undue influence exerted by the 5th Respondent on the police. It is stated that, on the other hand, Crime Nos. 820/2011 and 822/2011 of Chathannoor Police Station were registered against the first Petitioner alleging offences punishable u/s 294b, 341, 323 and under 332 of IPC respectively. Against the partisan attitude of the 4th Respondent, the Petitioner had submitted a complaint to the Director General of Police, as per Ext.P3. But no action was taken. It is stated that, even thereafter on 24/6/2011, there was a threat from the side of the 5th Respondent and his henchmen on the life of the Petitioners. Since no action was taken in spite of repeated complaints, the Petitioners are approaching this Court.
Heard Sri.T.K. Vipin Das learned Government Pleader on behalf of the Respondents 1 to 4. On the basis of instructions received from the 4th Respondent, it is submitted that based on a complaint received from the 5th Respondent regarding assault caused by the 1st Petitioner at his shop Crime No. 820/2011 was registered against the Petitioners. It is further stated that on a subsequent day when the first Petitioner was summoned to the police station he had even assaulted the policemen at the station house, for which crime No. 822/2011 was registered. It is further stated that, apart from proceeding with investigation of those cases, the police authorities are not taking any partisan attitude or colluding with the 5th Respondent, as alleged. The Government Pleader submitted that according to the 4th Respondent, the averments regarding threat to the lives of the Petitioners is baseless.
Considering the factual circumstances as narrated above, we notice that the Petitioners are accused in two cases registered at Chathannoor Police station. It is left open to the 4th Respondent to conduct proper investigation with respect to those cases. However, if there is any threat to the lives of the Petitioners from the side of the 5th Respondent or anybody acting under him, it is for Respondents 3 and 4 to take appropriate action in order to avert any criminal acts. The Respondents 3 and 4 should keep a vigil on the situation and should take necessary steps to avert any untoward incidents hereafter. Since no material is produced to show that there is a threat to the lives of the Petitioners, we are not inclined to grant any direction for police protection as sought for. However, if any information is received regarding threat to lives and person of the Petitioners, the Respondents 3 and 4 should take appropriate steps.
The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations and directions.