BIJULAL M.S Vs. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are conducting a whole sale business in rubber at Agasthacode. Respondents 3 to 6 were helping them in business and they were also having financial transactions between them. It is contended that respondents 3 to 6 have now joined hands with the business rivals of the petitioners and are in inimical terms with them. 3rd respondent has also filed a money suit as well as a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against the 1st petitioner misusing some cheques, which was obtained by him. The party respondents are constantly creating nuisance and obstructing the smooth functioning of petitioners' business. Petitioners filed Exts.P2 and P3 compliant respectively before respondents 1 and 2, but no action has been taken on that due to the influence exerted by the party respondents. Copy of the general dairy maintained by the 1st respondent is Ext.P1. Exts.P4 and P5 are the receipts evidencing filing of the complaints. It is prayed that respondents 1 and 2 may be directed by means of a writ of mandamus to give adequate and effective police protection to the life of the petitioners and the members of their family and to see that respondents 3 to 6 did not in any way interfere with the smooth conduct of the business of the petitioners.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the petitioners and the Government Pleader were heard. Documents perused.

(3.) It is admitted that there is a money suit pending between the petitioners and the 3rd respondent and that may be reason for their being in inimical terms. But there is no other material on record to indicate that there is any threat to the life of the petitioners and members of their family. However, respondents 1 and 2 are directed to take appropriate steps necessary in case of any criminal offence is committed or intended to be committed against the petitioners. With these observations, the petition is dismissed.