KARIMPANAKKAL HAMSA Vs. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate and effective police protection against the threat of physical harm faced by the petitioner from respondents 4 to 8.

(2.) Briefly put, the facts are stated hereinbelow:- The petitioner married the eldest sister of respondents 4 and 7. Fifth and sixth respondents are close friends of the fourth respondent. Eighth respondent is the father-in-law of the fifth respondent. The petitioner is engaged in the business of production and sale of drinking water at Jeddah in Saudi Arabia under the sponsorship of a Saudi Arabian citizen. Respondents 4 to 6 were former employees of the petitioner in Jeddah at Saudi Arabia. The fourth respondent was working as the Manager of the peittioner and fifth and sixth respondents were working as Field Staff of the petitioner. The fifth and sixth respondents were brought to Saudi Arabia at the instance of the fourth respondent and the petitioner provided employment to them in his company. It is alleged that while the 4th respondent was working with the petitioner, he had committed various financial irregularities and accumulated wealth. After realising the true state of affairs, the petitioner had terminated the contract with the fourth respondent and filed a case against him before the court at Jadda for recovery of money. The court has directed the 4th respondent to pay an amount of 53,500 Riyal to the petitioner and the petitioner had received the same through court. The petitioner also filed yet another case against the 4th respondent at Jeddah court for realization of an amount of 70,000 Riyal and the above case is pending consideration. In view of the above facts, it is alleged that the fourth respondent has been in inimical terms with the petitioner and attempted to threaten the wife and children of the petitioner with dire consequences. Petitioners filed Exts.P3,P4,P6 and P8 complaints before respondents 1 to 3 seeking police protection for the life of the petitioner and his family members. However, no action has been taken. Hence the petitioner is before us.

(3.) Fourth respondent filed counter affidavit for and on behalf of the seventh respondent as well. According to the 4 th respondent, as his father died before the marriage of the petitioner with his sister, right from the time of their marriage, all members of the family have been keeping the petitioner in the very high esteem and treating him with all respect and reverence as the eldest member of the family. As the 4th respondent was regularly abroad, taking advantage of the position and situation, the petitioner and his wife advised him to send the purchase price for house plots to the account of the petitioner to enable them to enter into agreements with prospective vendors of the respective properties and to ultimately purchase the same in his name utilising the money sent by him from and out of his source. Relying on their words and reposing confidence on them, the 4 th respondent decided to purchase various plots depending upon his capacity and availability of funds. Accordingly, the properties were purchased by him through the petitioner and his wife. Later, it was realised that the petitioner and his wife had played fraud on him and purchased the entire properties in the name of the petitioner, his wife and children. In view of the same, the fourth respondent filed Ext.R4(a) suit as O.S.No.24/2016 before the Sub Court, Perinthalmanna for declaration of his title over the said properties. It is also alleged that the petitioner has collected huge amounts from different persons offering visa which were not given, as promised. According to the party respondents, petitioner wanted to prevent even the persons coming near to his house demanding the amounts due from him to them under the cover of an order of police protection, which he intends to get from this Court.