SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 3760

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
N. NAGARESH, J
RAJITHA.A – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) 41850/2022



Advocates:
SANKARAN NAIR D.G.MANU (M-1316), SRI.E.C.BINEESH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The court reinforced the principle that police protection is warranted for vulnerable individuals facing threats but clarified that civil disputes should not be adjudicated through writ petitions.

Headnote:

Protection - Scheduled Caste - IPC Sections, Prevention of Atrocities Act - The court discussed the applicability of various IPC sections and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, emphasizing the importance of police protection for vulnerable community members in civil disputes.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Scheduled Caste member, sought police protection due to alleged encroachment and violence by neighbors from another community over a common pathway.

Issues: Whether the court should provide a mandamus for police protection in a civil dispute involving a Scheduled Caste petitioner facing harassment from neighbors.

Ratio Decidendi: The court stated that disputes of a civil nature should not be resolved through writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, as the criminal justice system was already engaged.

Final Decision: Writ petition disposed of; police to act if further physical assault occurs.

J U D G M E N T

Dated this the 30th day of January, 2023 The petitioner, who is member of a Scheduled Caste community, has approached this Court seeking to command respondents 1 to 4 to provide police protection to the petitioner.

2. The petitioner states that she is the owner of 21 Cents in Kattachira in Alappuzha District, where she is residing after construction of a house. Respondents 5 to 7 are neighbours of the petitioner, who belong to other community.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondents 5 to 7 are encroaching upon the 2 metres common pathway and are starting construction of a 10 feet high compound wall. When the petitioner objected to such construction, the petitioner was brutally assaulted. The petitioner being member of a Scheduled Caste community is not in a position to physically prevent respondents 5 to 7 from encroachment.

4. The petitioner is under physical threat, contends the petitioner. Hence, a mandamus is to be issued to respondents 1 to 4 to take immediate action on Exts.P3 to P5 complaints filed by the petitioner.

5. Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that there is a dispute in respect of a pathway between the petitioner and other local residents. When complaints were received, FIR was registered under Sections 341 , 294(b), 323 and 354 IPC read with Sections 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. The police is keeping a vigil, contended the Government Pleader.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents. In view of the nature of the relief to be granted in this writ petition, notice to respondents 5 to 7 is dispensed with.

7. After perusing the writ petition and after hearing the arguments raised on either side, it is evident that the dispute raised by the petitioner is of a purely civil nature which cannot be resolved through proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The pleadings would show that whenever complaints were filed before the police, FIR is lodged and criminal investigation machinery is put into motion. In the circumstances, I have no reason to find that respondents 3 and

4 will not take any action if any law and order issue arises.

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing that if the petitioner brings to the notice of the 4th respondent any physical assault or criminal force, the

4th respondent will act in accordance with law.

Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE sss APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41850/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE DATED 13.03.2013.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE FROM DISTRICT HOSPITAL, MAVELIKKARA SHOWING DATE OF ADMISSION AS 10.11.2022.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R NO: 0583 DATED

11.11.2022 OF VALLIKKUNNAM POLICE STATION.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION TO THE STATE POLICE CHIEF, KERALA DATED 02.12.2022.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION TO THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA DATED 08.12.2022.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top