P.M. VARKEY, HOUSE NO. 426, AGED 70 YEARS, CARBORANDOM ROAD, KD PLOT SOUTH KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER in the writ petition is the appellant. Writ petition is filed alleging that a person by name Deepu had trespassed into the property belonging to the son in law of the petitioner. Though a crime was registered, no action is being taken. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the Police is bound to take preventive measures against further trespass and since no action is being taken, he sought for a direction to the 2nd respondent to entrust investigation in the said crime to a Senior officer preferably Deputy Superintendent of Police and further to take action against the accused as contemplated under section 149 of Cr. P.C. The learned Single Judge, after considering the matter, dismissed the writ petition. It is argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the police is under obligation to evict the trespasser, as it is clear from the facts that the accused had trespassed into the property of the appellant. It is also stated that Deepu was the helper of a person by name Muraleedharan who was running a poultry farm belonging to the appellant and after the poultry farm was closed, the said Deepu trespassed into the adjacent building.

(2.) ON a perusal of the averments in the writ petition and writ appeal, it is clear that Muraleedharan was permitted to be a caretaker of the poultry farm conducted by the appellant and there had been some disputes in relation to the closure of the poultry farm. If it is a matter relating to an action that would be taken by the Police, we do not think that the Police will refrain from exercising such powers. But if it is a civil dispute, police is not bound to Writ Appeal No. 1574 of 2012 evict a person. In that event the remedy available to the appellant will only be to seek possession of the property or an injunction by way of a proper civil suit. It is not in doubt that action can be taken by the Police against a trespasser even under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code. But since the alleged trespasser is not impleaded in the case, we are unable to consider the exact nature of the dispute. Under these circumstances, we do not think that there is any necessity to entrust the investigation of the crime with another senior officer as claimed by the appellant or to grant any other relief. We find no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.