SATHEESH BABU Vs. DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

(2.) BRIEFLY put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is the registered owner of an autorickshaw and he is plying the same. Ext.P1 is the Registration Certificate, Ext.P2 is the driving licence and Ext.P3 is the permit. As per Ext.P3 the parking place is at Kurisinkal, Kanjirappally. When the petitioner started operation in June, 2012, respondents 3 to 8 who are stated to be existing drivers plying autorickshaws at Kurisinkal Stand, obstructed the petitioner and threatened that he will not be allowed to ply the vehicle at Kurisinkal stand. There is reference to physical attack by respondents 3 to 6 and hospitalisation of the petitioner, leading to Ext.P5 FIR. Even thereafter, due to the threat and intimidation by respondents 3 to 8, petitioner is not able to ply the vehicle. Petitioner filed Ext.P7 complaint and is before us.

(3.) ACCORDING to learned counsel for the petitioner, Ext.P3 evidences the grant of a permit in favour of the petitioner with the parking place shown as Kurisinkal, Kanjirappally. He is being prevented and there is threat and a criminal case also is there.