Back
2010 Supreme(Online)(KER) 28037
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.M.JOSEPH, T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ
THAHA AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS – Respondent
WP(C)/22181/2010
SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN, SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR, SRI.K.JAGADEESH2) ABDUL JABBAR AGED 35 YEARS
The court established that genuine threats necessitate police protection, but ongoing legal matters must remain unaffected by this judgment.
Headnote:
Mandamus - Police Protection - N/A - The court issued a directive for police protection contingent on genuine threats to the petitioners and clarified the judiciary's independence in any related litigation.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought police protection due to threats allegedly posed by the 4th respondent concerning financial disputes involving a relative who was abroad.
Finding of the Court:
The court instructed that police protection must be provided if genuine threats are reported by the petitioners, while reaffirming that ongoing legal matters would not be influenced by its judgment.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to police protection given the reported threats to their lives.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for immediate police intervention when credible threats are reported while underscoring that its ruling does not affect judicial processes in ongoing disputes.
Final Decision: The writ petition is disposed of with directions for police protection as needed.
J U D G M E N T
K.M.Joseph, J.
Petitioners have approached this Court seeking the following relief:
“to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction directing the respondents 2 and 3 to provide adequate and sufficient police protection to the life of the petitioners their family members.”
2. The case of the petitioners in short is as follows:
There is threat to their lives and the lives of their family members from the 4th respondent and two others. This is on the basis that the brother of the petitioners' Tahir owed amounts to them. Tahir is in Dubai and he stated to the petitioners that he had not borrowed any amount as alleged by the trespassers.
3. The 4th respondent denies the allegations made by the petitioner. A counter affidavit is filed by the 4th respondent wherein cheques alleged to have been given by Tahir have been produced. In view of the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:
As and when petitioners bring to the notice of the WPC No.22181/2010 -2-
3rd respondent any threat from the 4th respondent to their lives or the lives of their wives, their children, their aged mother and their elder sister from the 4th respondent, the 3rd respondent shall look into the same and if the complaint of threat is found to be genuine, he shall afford sufficient police protection to the lives of the petitioners, the lives of their wives, their children, their aged mother and their elder sister from the 4th respondent. We make it clear that, if the matter comes before any Court/forum in a lis between the parties, the Court/forum shall proceed to decide the same untrammelled by anything contained in this judgment.
(K.M.JOSEPH)
JUDGE.
(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)
JUDGE.
MS
