Remya Soman v. State of Kerala & Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.1144 OF 2021(P)** ## **PETITIONER:** **REMYA SOMAN AGED 31 YEARS, D/O. BINU, MADATHIVILA HOUSE, IRAKKUZHI P.O. MANKODE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 559.** **BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.** - **2 SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 508.** - **3 DEPUTY SUERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 305.** - **4 STATION HOUSE OFFICER (C.I. OF POLICE), KADAKKAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 536.** - **5 SAMEENA, D/O. SAINUDDIN, PANAYIL HOUSE, AIRAKKUZHI P.O. CHITHARA MURI, MANKODE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 559.** - **6 SHYAMALA, THEKKEDATH HOUSE, AIRAKKUZHI P.O. CHITHARA MURI, MANKODE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 559.** - **7 RAHUL CAHNDRAN, THEKKEDATH HOUSE, AIRAKKUZHI P.O. CHITHARA MURI, MANKODE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 559.** WP(C).No.1144 OF 2021(P) 2 **8 VIJAYAMMA, THEKKEDATH HOUSE, AIRAKKUZHI P.O. CHITHARA MURI, MANKODE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 559. 9 SARASAMMA, THEKKEDATH HOUSE, AIRAKKUZHI P.O. CHITHARA MURI, MANKODE VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 559.** **R1-R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. A.C.VIDHYA R5-R9 BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C).No.1144 OF 2021(P) 3 ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner, who is stated to be the owner in possession and enjoyment of 15 cents of land comprised in Sy.No.686/12/2, Re.Sy.Nos.161/1 and 161/2 of Block No.23 in Mankode Village, covered by Ext.P1 Settlement Deed No.1228/2012 dated 24.02.2017 of Sub Registrar Office, Chithara, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 to 4 to afford adequate and effective police protection to the petitioner for using the pathway leading to her property covered by Ext.P1, as per Ext.P5 order of injunction passed by the Munsiff's Court, Kottarakkara in I.A.No.764 of 2018 in O.S.No.107 of 2018, against any threat from respondents 5 to 9. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 to 4 to take immediate steps for registering FIR based on Exts.P7 to P9 petitions and to investigate the same in accordance with law. The grievance of the petitioner is against threat/obstruction from the side of respondents 5 to 9. The petitioner has obtained Ext.P5 order of injunction in I.A.No.764 of 2018 in O.S.No.107 of 2018, which is still in force. The petitioner filed Exts.P7, P8 and P9 4 WP(C).No.1144 OF 2021(P) complaints before respondents 2, 3 and 4 respectively, and thereafter moved this writ petition before this Court seeking the aforesaid reliefs. 2. On 15.01.2021, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader took notice on admission for respondents 1 to 4. Urgent notice on admission by speed post was ordered to respondents 5 to 9, returnable within two weeks. The 4[th] respondent Station House Officer was directed to ensure that there is no threat to the law and order in the locality at the instance of respondents 5 to 9. 3. A statement has been filed by the 4[th] respondent Station House Officer opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. 4. Respondents 5 to 9 have filed counter affidavit opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition, wherein it is pointed out that the 5[th] respondent has obtained Ext.R5(a) order of injunction against the petitioner and others in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in O.S.No.570 of 2020, in respect of the pathway in dispute. In the counter affidavit it is also pointed out that, the petitioner is not a resident in the locality and she is residing at Kottayam. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned WP(C).No.1144 OF 2021(P) 5 Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4 and the learned counsel for respondents 5 to 9. 6. 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 WP(C).No.1144 OF 2021(P) 6 with the law. 7. Lord Denning in 'The Due Process of law' [First Indian 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." 8. 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]** . 9. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record WP(C).No.1144 OF 2021(P) 7 and also the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this Court finds that there are civil disputes between the petitioner and respondents 5 to 9, in respect of the pathway in question. The petitioner obtained Ext.P5 order of injunction in I.A.No.764 of 2018 in O.S.No.107 of 2018, which is still in force. On the other hand, the 5[th] respondent obtained Ext.R5(a) order of injunction in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in O.S.No.570 of 2020 against the petitioner and others, which is still in force. When the civil dispute between the petitioner and respondents 5 to 9 are pending consideration before the competent civil court and both parties have obtained Ext.P5 and Ext.R5(a) order of injunction, it is for them to act strictly in accordance with those orders. In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: - (I) The 4[th] 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 civil dispute between the petitioner and respondents 5 to 9. - (ii) In case of any violation of the order of injunction, it is for the respective parties to approach the civil court by WP(C).No.1144 OF 2021(P) 8 invoking the provisions under Rule 2A of Order XXXIX of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. **Sd/-** **ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE** JV WP(C).No.1144 OF 2021(P) 9 ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT NO. 1228 OF 2012 DATED 24.07.2012 OF SRO, CHITHARA.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT BEARING THANDAPER NO. 6766 DATED 6.1.2021 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MANKODE VILLAGE TO THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. NO. 107 OF 2018 BEFORE THE MUNSIFFS COURT, KOTTARAKKARA.** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION PETITION (I.A. NO. 764 OF 2018 ) IN O.S. NO. 107 OF 2018 BEFORE THE MUNSIFFS COURT, KOTTARAKKARA.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.03.2018 IN (I.A. NO. 764 OF 2018 ) IN O.S. NO. 107 OF 2018 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFFS COURT, KOTTARAKKARA.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DATED 5.12.2019 FILED BY THE DEFENDANTS 1 TO 5 IN O.S. NO. 107 OF 2018 BEFORE THE MUNSIFFS COURT, KOTTARAKKARA.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 1.1.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P7 (A) TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FOR HAVING SENT EXHIBIT P7.** - **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 1.1.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P8 (A) TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 5.1.21 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FOR HAVING SENT EXHIBIT P8.** WP(C).No.1144 OF 2021(P) 10 ## **EXHIBIT P9** **TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 1.1.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P9 (A) TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DTD. 9.1.21 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FOR HAVING SENT EXHIBIT P 9.** ## **RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT R5(A)** **TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.12.2020 IN IA 1/2020 IN OS NO.570/2020 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, KOTTARAKKARA**