K V SATHYANATHAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KANNUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has come to this Court asserting the claim that he has as one of the co-owners of an item of property measuring about 86 cents in Chirakkal Amsom and Desom. According to the petitioner, respondents 4 to 7, whom the petitioner describes to be R.S.S activists, are demanding that the property must be given free of cost to them. THEy are not allowing the petitioner to deal with the property or exercise his rights in respect of the property. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court seeking police protection for his life and property.

(2.) RESPONDENTS have been served. The 7th respondent has entered appearance and the others have not entered appearance. The 7th respondent contends that he is at a loss to understand why he has been arrayed as a respondent in this proceedings. He belongs to the Chirakkal Kovilakam and except this, he cannot find any connection between him and the disputes projected by the petitioner. RESPONDENTS 4 to 6, though served, have not chosen to enter appearance.

(3.) IN any view of the matter, we are not satisfied that the dispute has to be or can be resolved in a petition for police protection. The petitioner must certainly get his right established and seek proper orders from the civil court. IN this proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution for affording police protection, such complicated issues about the rights of individuals cannot be adjudicated and settled.