Protection against threats should be provided when credible threats to life are established.

JUDGMENT

The writ petition seeks for the grant of police protection to the life and property of the petitioner as well as for a direction to register an FIR pursuant to Exhibit-P1 complaint and also for a direction to hand over the investigation to a Special Investigation Team or any independent agency.

2. Petitioner alleges that he was introduced to the 5^th respondent in the year 2021, who proclaimed himself to be a Senior Advocate practicing before the Supreme Court of India as well as this Court, and also claims that the 6^th respondent, stated to be his wife, was also a Senior Advocate practicing in this Court. Petitioner further alleges that, believing those representations, he developed acquaintance with the 5^th respondent, who subsequently persuaded the petitioner to form a Charitable Trust with his friends, claiming that he was a consultant, who can facilitate arrangement of CSR funds from reputed corporate entities. Acting on the said inducement, petitioner and four others registered a charitable trust by the name ‘Swanthanam Health Animal Charitable Trust’, but soon thereafter, according to the petitioner, the 5^th respondent started demanding huge amounts, and the petitioner had to part with the amount demanded. Subsequently, the respondents refused to attend to the telephone calls of the petitioner. It is alleged that, later, petitioner came to know that the 5^th respondent is an accused in a notorious criminal case and have committed similar frauds against various persons. On coming to know about those aspects, petitioner filed a complaint before the Commissioner of Police. On learning about the filing of the said complaint, respondents started threatening him at the inducement of the 5^th respondent. Fearing threat to his life, petitioner petition before the 3^rd respondent and has approached this Court with this writ petition, since no relief has been granted by the Police.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents

5 and 6 pointing out that the entire allegations in the writ petition are false, as the petitioner and the 6^th respondent knew each other much earlier and that the 6^th respondent had even appeared for the petitioner as well as for the 5^th respondent as an Advocate. Reliance is placed on Annexure R6(k), a photocopy of vakalath executed by the petitioner in favour of the 6th respondent. It is also stated that there are criminal cases registered against the petitioner, including S. T. No.923 of 2023 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad and therefore, petitioner is not entitled for any police protection.

4. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner is not arrayed as an accused in the crime, though some of his employees are arrayed as accused in respect of an offence arising under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 . It was also submitted that a crime has been registered pursuant to the complaint of the petitioner as FIR No.49 of 2026 of Kadavanthra Police Station, against the 5^th respondent as well as the 6^th respondent.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for respondents 5 and 6 as well as the learned Government Pleader.

6. Petitioner’s complaint Exhibit-P1 was followed by a petition before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam, which has resulted in the registration of FIR No.49 of 2026 of Kadavanthra Police Station. The offences alleged include Sections 316 (2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 . The issue relates to certain amounts allegedly collected by the contesting respondents and others towards CSR funds, projecting themselves as CSR consultants. As per the FIR, large amount of money is allegedly collected by respondents 5 and 6 from the petitione