Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Abdul Rasheed vs Rageesh Kumar. R

Abdul Rasheed vs Rageesh Kumar. R

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 01, 2024
~5 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1300600

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Con.Case(C)/1999/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Abdul Rasheed

Respondent

Rageesh Kumar. R

Excerpt

.....petitioner is submitted along with this affidavit for kind consideration of hon'ble court. true copy of the statement of neighbours are produced herewith and marked as annexure ri(a).10. it is submitted that the petitioner in his statement of facts, submitted alongwith the contempt case, states that on 02.06.2023 at 04.00 pm the henchmen of respondent 2 and 3 trespassed into the house of petitioner destroyed the fencing of his property in violation of the injection order of hon. munsiff court thiruvananthapuram. the fact is that there is no house in the scheduled property of petitioner, where a henchmen of respondent 2 and 3 can trespass and the petitioner is residing 3 km away from the site, near to nemom police quarters. from the above submission of the petitioner, it is proved that the petitioner is trying to mislead the hon'ble court.11. it is submitted that the petitioner is well aware that public population isagainst encroachment of revenue land used by them as pathway. when the petitioner made such an attempt, they approached panchayat and neyyar irrigation authorities and restrained him. as directed by the authorities he approached the neyyar irrigation project assistant engineer and the application submitted by the petitioner was send to tahsildar, thiruvananthapuram. while ..4..the application is under processing the petitioner willfully tries to encroach the revenue land even though he was well aware that the boundary was not determined by the authorities and in these circumstances, he will have to face the objection from the public. this attempt from the part of petitioner was purely with an intention to create problem. but when no untoward incidents had happened, the petitioner preferred a complaint alleging assault after creating favorable medical records. on enquiry, when allegation was proved as false, for obtaining a favorable orders from the hon'ble high court of kerala the petitioner has appeared before the hon. court with this.....

Full Judgment

..1..

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 12TH MAGHA, 1945 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1999 OF 2023 AGAINST THE ORDER IN WP(C).NO.14144/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA PETITIONER:

ABDUL RASHEED, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. ABUBACKER,ALUVILA PURAYIDAM, NEAR NEMOM POLICE QUARTERS, NEMOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695020 BY ADVS.M/S.G.SUDHEER, R.HARIKRISHNAN (H-308) & SMRITHI S.S. RESPONDENT: RAGEESH KUMAR R., INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEMOM POLICE STATION, NEMOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695020. SRI.PREMCHAND R.NAIR, SR.G.P. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..2..

MOHAMMED NIAS C. P. , J.

========================= Cont. Case (C) No. 1999 of 2023 ========================= Dated this the 1st day of February, 2024

JUDGMENT

This Contempt of Court case has been filed alleging non- compliance with the order of this Court dated 25.4.2023 in WP(C). No. “Government Pleader to get instructions on behalf of R1. Notice by Speed Post to R2 and R3. There will be an interim order directing the R1 to take appropriate action, in accordance with law on Exhibit P3 complaint made against the threat by respondents 2 and 3 to the life of the petitioner.”

2. The petitioner alleges that the henchmen of respondents 2 & 3 in WP(C). No. 14144/2023 attacked the petitioner on 2.6.2023. The respondent herein has filed a counter, wherein, it is stated as follows:

“9. It is submitted that from the statements of persons who were present in the site including his workers, no such incident of assault on petitioner had happened on 02.06.2023 evening. On knowing about the direction of panchayat for stopping the work, the petitioner reached the site around 04.00 PM and ..3..

returned with his workers after observing the situation he returned. With his unfair intention to initiate legal action against the Public the petitioner preferred this false complaint before Police. When police enquiry revealed the truth, the petitioner turned against me with Contempt of Court case. The photographs taken from the site, signed statements recorded from neighboring people and workers who were engaged in fencing work by the petitioner is submitted along with this affidavit for kind consideration of Hon'ble Court. True copy of the statement of neighbours are produced herewith and marked as Annexure RI(a).

10. It is submitted that the petitioner in his statement of facts, submitted along

with the contempt case, states that on 02.06.2023 at 04.00 PM the henchmen of respondent 2 and 3 trespassed into the house of petitioner destroyed the fencing of his property in violation of the injection order of Hon. Munsiff court Thiruvananthapuram. The fact is that there is no house in the scheduled property of petitioner, where a henchmen of respondent 2 and 3 can trespass and the petitioner is residing 3 Km away from the site, near to Nemom police quarters. From the above submission of the petitioner, it is proved that the petitioner is trying to mislead the Hon'ble Court.

11. It is submitted that the petitioner is well aware that public population is

against encroachment of revenue land used by them as pathway. When the petitioner made such an attempt, they approached Panchayat and Neyyar Irrigation authorities and restrained him. As directed by the authorities he approached the Neyyar Irrigation project Assistant engineer and the application submitted by the petitioner was send to Tahsildar, Thiruvananthapuram. While ..4..

the application is under processing the petitioner willfully tries to encroach the revenue land even though he was well aware that the boundary was not determined by the authorities and in these circumstances, he will have to face the objection from the public. This attempt from the part of petitioner was purely with an intention to create problem. But when no untoward incidents had happened, the petitioner preferred a complaint alleging assault after creating favorable medical records. On enquiry, when allegation was proved as false, for obtaining a favorable Orders from the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala the petitioner has appeared before the Hon. Court with this false allegation of contempt case”

3. Given the serious dispute between the petitioner and the

respondent as to whether the incident as alleged happened on 2.6.2023 and that the issue essentially pertains to a dispute regarding the property for which a civil suit filed by the petitioner against the aforementioned respondents 2 & 3 is pending, without prejudice to any of the contentions of the petitioner in the said suit, this Contempt of Court need not be proceeded further. Accordingly, this Contempt of Court case is closed.

Sd/- MOHAMMED NIAS C. P., JUDGE MMG ..5.. APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C).NO.1999/2023 PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER

DATED 25.4.2023 IN W.P.(C) NO. ANNEXURE A2 COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. NO. 1/2023 IN O.S. NO. 719/2023 OF LEARNED 4TH ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (RCC) ANNEXURE A3 COPY OF THE OUTPATIENT MEDICAL RECORDS ISSUED FROM GENERAL HOSPITAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 2.6.2023 ANNEXURE A4 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 14.8.2023 ANNEXURE A5 PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BY THE WORKERS OF THE PETITIONER AT THE TIME OF THE ATTACK ANNEXURE A6 COPY OF THE APPROVED LOCATION AND SITE PLAN PREPARED AND PRODUCED BEFORE THE IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE BRIDGE RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF NEIGHBOURS ANNEXURE R1 (B) TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE EXISTENCE OF A PATHWAY BETWEEN THE CANAL AND THE LANDED PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER AND OTHERS

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial