Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 12192
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ANU SIVARAMAN, J
SOBY GEORGE KALABHAVAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE POLICE CHIEF & DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE – Respondent
WP(C)/28379/2021
The right to life under Article 21 necessitates state protection when threats are credible, supporting individuals’ requests for police intervention.
Headnote:
Protection - Life Safety - Writ of Mandamus - Section 4, Article 21 - The court emphasized the right to life and safety under Article 21, interpreting it as foundational in granting police protection to individuals facing threats.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner seeks police protection amid threats to his life due to his position as a school owner. There's a prior interim order for protection, but the respondents claimed no ongoing threats were reported, citing past criminal cases against the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the only pertinent issue is the need for protection of the petitioner's life and directed that appropriate protection be offered if a threat is perceived, leaving other claims for different legal proceedings.
Issues: Does the petitioner require police protection based on alleged threats to his life?
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the right to life under Article 21 as necessitating police protection when threats are perceivable, regardless of the petitioner's criminal history.
Final Decision: The writ petition is ordered, granting police protection as needed.
JUDGMENT
1.This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:- “i)Issue a writ of mandamus or an order in its nature, commanding respondents 2 and 3 to render sufficient police protection to the life of the petitioner, his family and staff members.”
2.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
3.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is running a school of arts at Oonnukal, Kothamangalam and that there is subsisting threat to his life at the instance of unknown persons and that he is entitled to protection to his life.
4.An interim order directing adequate protection to the life and property of the petitioner was passed on 10.12.2021. However, a statement has been placed on record by the respondents producing the instructions of the Station House Officer to the effect that there is no report of any threat to the life of the petitioner and that in case of any threat, if the petitioner makes a request, adequate protection to life will be provided by the respondents. It is also stated that there are several criminal cases pending against the petitioner and that the attempt is to escape from the criminal proceedings by taking recourse to the police protection.
5.An affidavit in reply has been filed to the statement filed by the 3rd respondent by the petitioner. It is stated therein that the cases registered against the petitioner were in 2012-2013 and have been settled and that there were attempts on the petitioner's life in December, 2021, which is evident from Exhibits P4 and P5 FIRs.
6.Having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the opinion that the only question which can be considered by this Court in these proceedings is with regard to the protection, if any, required for the life of the petitioner. All other matters are to be decided in appropriate proceedings and after conducting due investigations in accordance with law.
7.There will, accordingly, be a direction that in case the petitioner apprehends any threat to his life, he may approach the Station House Officer, who shall afford adequate protection to the life of the petitioner. All other issues are left open to be decided in appropriate proceedings.
Writ petition is ordered accordingly.
sd/- Anu Sivaraman, Judge sj APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28379/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DT 7-08-2019 IN WP(C) NO.
18851/2019 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 5-11-2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 26-11-2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1258/2021 OF OONNUKAL POLICE STATION.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT.
True copy PS to Judge
