The Court declined police protection due to ongoing investigations into mutual claims of criminal acts between the petitioners and respondents.

JUDGMENT

Petitioners seek for a direction to grant police protection to the life and assets of the petitioners and their employees from respondents 2 to 7. A further direction is also sought to take action on Ext.P5 complaint with immediate effect.

2. Petitioners are siblings who are allegedly running an establishment providing coaching in German language. They allege that respondents 2 to 7 and their associates are indulging in criminal acts against the petitioners. The petitioners also allege that the contesting respondents had damaged the vehicle by puncturing both tyres, and also assaulted them and even threatened to kill them. Since the police did not act despite, request, they have filed this writ petition.

3. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 2 to 7 wherein they have denied the allegations of assault. According to them, they are the office bearers of the association of shop owners in an establishment called 'Jacob's DD Mall' and that, after the respondents formed the association petitioners objected to such a formation, and filed this writ petition. It is further stated that the contesting respondents have no intention to harm the petitioners.

.

4 On a reading of the pleading in the writ petition, as well as after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, as well as the learned counsel for respondents 2 to 7 and the learned Government Pleader, this Court is of the view that no reason exists to exercise the discretionary relief to grant of police protection.

5. Already, a crime has been registered as Crime No. 382/2025 at the Ernakulam Central Police Station against respondents 2 to 7, while Crime No. 383/2025 has been registered against the petitioners at the behest of the 2^nd respondent. Post crime, the role of each party is under investigation. It is evident that the petitioners and the contesting respondents are at loggerheads with each other. Hence, grant of police protection to one party will tilt the balance unequally. Therefore, the relief sought for is declined. However, in case any untoward incident is apprehended, petitioners shall be at liberty to approach the 1st respondent, who shall immediately act on the basis of such an intimation and avert any law and order situation as well as any threat to the life of the petitioners.

This writ petition is disposed of with the above observations.

sd/-