Omanan E. Moraes vs The Circle Inspector of Police, The Sub Inspector of Police, Justus fernandez and Felix Moraes

R. Basant, J.—The Petitioner has come to this Court complaining of contumacious and culpable conduct on the part of Respondents 3 and 4. An order of police protection under Article 226 is claimed by the Petitioner against such conduct on the part of Respondents 3 and 4.

According to the Petitioner, he is the owner of the property covered by Ext.P1 certificate. Respondents 3 and 4 are allegedly not permitting the Petitioner to enter into such land. They are cutting and removing the trees from the property. They are also attempting to remove sand from the property. It is in these circumstances that the Petitioner has sought issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Service is complete. Respondent No. 4 has entered appearance through counsel. The learned Counsel for the fourth Respondent submits that the Petitioner and the third Respondent are acting in collision. The fourth Respondent is not attempting to remove any sand from such property. According to the fourth Respondent, there are civil disputes between the parties about the land in question. Parties are before the civil court and it is for the parties to seek appropriate specific directions from the civil court. That having not been done, the Petitioner is not entitled to come to this Court complaining of threat to life.

Relief is claimed only regarding threat to life. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions submits that in the perception of the police officials-Respondents 1 and 2, there is no threat to the life of the Petitioner from Respondents 3 and 4. It is true that there are civil disputes between the parties. They have to get their civil disputes resolved by seeking appropriate orders from the civil court in the pending proceedings or in the proceedings to be initiated. At any rate, Respondents 1 and 2 shall ensure that there is no threat to the life of the Petitioner. It is not necessary to issue any specific directions to afford protection to the life of the Petitioner as no such imminent threat is apprehended. Police shall do the needful if there be any such threat. Though there are disputes between the parties, specific threat to life is not perceived by the police officials.

We have considered all the relevant inputs. We need not express any opinion on merits about the civil dispute between the parties. It is for the parties to seek appropriate directions from the civil court regarding their rights for enjoyment of the property in question. In the circumstances of the case, we do not find any reason to issue any specific directions to afford protection for the life of the Petitioner. We accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader on behalf of Respondents 1 and 2 that if there be any such threats, necessary and needful action shall be taken by Respondents 1 and 2.

Accepting that submissions of the learned Government Pleader on behalf of Respondents 1 and 2, this writ petition is dismissed.