Martin V.M v. Superintendent of Police, Ernakulam (Rural); Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ernakulam (Rural); Circle Inspector of Police, Njarackal; Pool Leader, Pool No.8, KHWWB, Valappu, Vypin; Addl. Convenor, Kerala Head Load Workers Welfare Board (Respondent 5)

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** ## **WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH CHAITHRA, 1943** ## **W.P.(C) No.7759 OF 2021(T)** ## **PETITIONER:** **MARTIN V.M, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. LATE MATHEW, VALURAN HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 525.** **BY ADVS. SRI.C.B.SREEKUMAR SRI.K.NATRAJ** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM (RURAL), POWER HOUSE JUNCTION, SUB JAIL ROAD, PERIYAR NAGAR, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683 101.** - **2 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM (RURAL), MUNAMBAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683 515.** - **3 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NJARACKAL POLICE STATION, NJARACKAL, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 505.** - **4 THE POOL LEADER, POOL NUMBER 8, (KHWWB) VALAPPU, VYPIN, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 525.** ***ADDL. R5 THE CONVENER, KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, NAYARAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM-682 509.** - **ADDL.R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 29.3.2021 IN I.A.NO.1/21 IN W.P.(C)NO.7759/2021.** **ADDL.R5 BY SRI.S.KRISHNA MOORTHY, SC, KHWWB** ## **R1-R3 SRI.JESTIN MATHEW, GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **W.P.(C) No.7759 OF 2021(T)** -2- ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner, who is running a business concern under the name and style 'FIVE BMS' at Malippuram, dealing with grocery, vegetables and chips, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1, 2 and 3 to afford and render adequate and necessary police protection to the life of the petitioner, enabling him to do business without any obstruction from the 4[th] respondent and his men. Going by the averments in the writ petition, for loading and unloading activities, the petitioner is having registered workers, who are holding Exts.P2 to P4 identity cards issued under Rule 26A of the Kerala Headload Workers' Rules, 1981. The grievance of the petitioner is regarding obstruction alleged to have been caused by the 4[th] respondent, who is the pool leader of Pool No.8 at Valappu, Vypin, in the loading and unloading activities undertaken in the petitioner's establishment. The petitioner submitted Ext.P5 complaint dated 21.03.2021 before the 2[nd] respondent and thereafter, moved this writ petition before this Court seeking the aforesaid relief. 2. On 29.03.2021, when this writ petition came up for ## **W.P.(C) No.7759 OF 2021(T)** -3- consideration, this Court allowed I.A.No.1 of 2021 filed by the petitioner seeking an order to implead the Convenor, Kerala Headload Workers Welfare Board as additional 5[th] respondent. The learned Government Pleader took notice on admission for respondents 1 to 3. Urgent notice on admission by special messenger was ordered to the 4[th] respondent, returnable by 31.03.2021. The learned Standing Counsel for the additional 5[th] respondent submitted that the area in which the petitioner's establishment is situated in a scheme covered area. This Court granted an interim order directing the 3[rd] respondent Station House Officer to take steps to ensure that there is no threat to law and order in the locality, in connection with the loading and unloading activities in the petitioner's establishment, by engaging the headload workers who have been issued with Exts.P2 to P4 identity cards, from the side of the 4[th] respondent and the headload workers under him. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and also the learned Standing Counsel for the additional 5[th] respondent. Despite service of notice, none appears for the 4[th] respondent. ## **W.P.(C) No.7759 OF 2021(T)** -4- 4. The Kerala Police Act, 2011 is enacted to consolidate and amend the law relating to the establishment, regulation, powers and duties of the Police Force in the State of Kerala and for matters connected therewith and incidental thereto. Chapter II of the Act deals with duties and functions of Police. Section 3 of the Act deals with general duties of Police. As per Section 3, the Police, as a service functioning category among the people as part of the administrative system shall, subject to the Constitution of India and the laws enacted thereunder, strive in accordance with the law, to ensure that all persons enjoy the freedoms and rights available under the law by ensuring peace and order, integrity of the nation, security of the State and protection of human rights. Section 4 of the Act deals with functions of Police. As per Section 4, the Police Officers shall, subject to the provisions of the Act, perform the functions enumerated in clauses (a) to (s) of Section 4. As per clause (a), the Police Officers shall enforce the law impartially; and as per clause (b), the Police Officers shall protect the life, liberty, property, human rights and dignity of all persons in accordance with the law. 5. Lord Denning in 'The Due Process of law' [First Indian ## **W.P.(C) No.7759 OF 2021(T)** -5- ## Reprint 1993, Page 102] has described the role of the Police thus; "In safeguarding our freedoms, the police play vital role. Society for its defence needs a well-led, well-trained and well-disciplined force or police whom it can trust, and enough of them to be able to prevent crime before it happens, or if it does happen, to detect it and bring the accused to justice. The police, of course, must act properly. They must obey the rules of right conduct. They must not extort confessions by threats or promises. They must not search a man's house without authority. They must not use more force than the occasion warrants." 6. In **Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secretary** **[(2014) 2 SCC 532]** the Apex Court held that, one of the responsibilities of the police is protection of life, liberty and property of citizens. The investigation of offences is one of the important duties the police has to perform. The aim of investigation is ultimately to search for truth and bring the offender to the book. The Apex Court reiterated the said principle in **Ankush Maruti Shinde v. State of Maharashtra [(2019) 15 SCC 470]** . 7. In **Raghavan v. Superintendent of Police [1998 (2) KLT 732]** , in the context of the Section 21 of of the Kerala ## **W.P.(C) No.7759 OF 2021(T)** -6- Headload Workers Act, 1978 and Rule 15 of the Kerala Headload Workers Rules, 1981, which deals with settlement of disputes, a Full Bench of this Court held that, the Act and the Rules provide for a machinery for settlement of disputes between the employer and the worker. In the normal course, the dispute between the employer and the headload workers employed by him are to be settled in accordance with the machinery thus provided under the Statute, just like in the case of any other labour dispute being settled in accordance with the provisions contained under the relevant Statutes. But the fact that there is a machinery provided under the Act to settle the disputes between the parties cannot stand in the way of the employer seeking police protection when there is a law and order problem. When such an employer approaches this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking protection of person and property of the employer as well as willing workers, this Court will be justified in granting direction to the police to give protection, if circumstances so warrant. One such consideration can be irreparable injury that would be suffered by the employer and/or the willing workers. There may be other circumstances also which would justify grant ## **W.P.(C) No.7759 OF 2021(T)** -7- of such direction in the facts of a particular case. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the petitioner's establishment, which is situated in a scheme covered area, loading and unloading activities are being undertaken by his own registered workers, who are holding Exts.P2 to P4 identity cards. 9. The learned Government Pleader would submit that, at present there is no law and order issues. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and also the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions; i) The 3[rd] respondent Station House Officer shall take necessary steps to ensure that there is no threat to law and order in the locality, in connection with any loading and unloading activities in the petitioner's establishment by engaging the registered workers holding Exts.P2 to P4 identity cards, from the side of headload workers under the 4[th] respondent. ii) In case there is any threat to the life of the petitioner or his employees holding Exts.P2 to P4 identity cards or any threat to law and order in the locality, at the instance of the headload workers under the 4[th] respondent, the petitioner shall move the 3[rd] respondent Station House Officer, with a proper request for police protection. -8- ## **W.P.(C) No.7759 OF 2021(T)** iii) In case any such request for Police protection is made by the petitioner, the 3[rd] respondent shall take necessary action on that request, without any delay, taking note of the statutory provisions referred to hereinbefore and also the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra. Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE** bpr -9- ## **W.P.(C) No.7759 OF 2021(T)** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY ELANKUNNAPPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 22.07.2020.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARDS OF RATHISH ISSUED BY ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, KOCHI DATED 17.03.2021.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARDS OF RAJI ISSUED BY ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, KOCHI DATED 17.03.2021.** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARDS OF SUNITHA ISSUED BY ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, KOCHI DATED 17.03.2021. EXHIBIT P5 PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 21.03.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH RECEIPT. EXHIBIT P6 PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 21.03.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT WITH RECEIPT.** **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL**