V.K. Usman Vs. the Si of Police - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1016884
CourtKerala High Court
Decided OnJul-23-2013
JudgeHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN
AppellantV.K. Usman
RespondentThe Si of Police
Excerpt:
in the high court of kerala at ernakulam present: the honourable mr.justice s.siri jagan & the honourable mr. justice k.ramakrishnan tuesday, the 23rd day of july 2013 1st sravana, 1935 wp(c).no. 15961 of 2013 (u) ---------------------------- petitioner(s): -------------------------- v.k. usman, secretary, nusrathul islam sangham juma masjid anappara p.o., karakode, edakkara malappuram district. by advs.sri.p.samsudin smt.nima jacob respondents: ---------------------------- 1. the sub inspector of police, vazhikkadavu, vazhikkadavu p.o.”329. malappuram district.2. the superintendant of police, malappuram district 67 505.3. abdu samad, s/o.moidutty, poyyakodi house, p.o.karakkode, edakkara malappuram district ”333. 4. kallingal abdulsalam, s/o.ismail, p.o.karakkode, edakkara malappuram district, pin ”333. 5. karappancheri shoukath, s/o.mohammed, p.o.karakkode, edakkara malappuram district, pin ”333. r3-r5 by adv. sri.k.anand r by government pleader sri.p.mohammed shah this writ petition (civil) having been finally heard on 23-07-2013, the court on the same day delivered the following: jm/- wp(c).no. 15961 of 2013 (u) ---------------------------- appendix petitioner(s)' exhibits ------------------------------------- ext.p1: true copy of the complaint dated 08 05/2013 submitted before the 1st respondent (along with english translation). ext.p2: true copy of the receipt issued by the 1st respondent. ext.p3: copy of the minutes of the general body meeting of believers held on 10.5.2013 ext.p4: copy of the representation signed by the members of the mahal, given to the ci of polic nilambur. respondent(s)' exhibits: nil --------------------------------------- \\ true copy \\ pa to judge jm s.siri jagan & k.ramakrishnan, jj.------------------------------------------------- w.p.(c) no.15961 of 2013 ================= dated this the 23rd day of july 2013 judgment -------------- s.siri jagan, j.the petitioner claims to be the general secretary of the administrative committee of nusrathul islam sangham juma masjid, anappara in edakkara, malappuram district. the mosque was established in 1968. the mosque is being administered by a committee elected from the members of the mahal from time to time. the petitioner claims that, in the last election to the administrative committee, the members of the mahal elected the petitioner and others and they have been administering the affairs of the mosque. the petitioner's complaint in this writ petition is that, respondents 3 to 5, who are the rival claimants for the administration of the committee are causing disturbances and obstructions to the smooth functioning of the mosque. according to the petitioner, respondents 3 to 5 are even obstructing the prayers in the mosque. despite seeking assistance from the police, the police has not obliged the petitioner. it is under the above w.p.(c) no.15961 o”2. circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction to the 1st respondent to provide adequate and effective police protection for the life of the petitioner, the members of administrative committee of nasratul islam sangham juma masjid, anappara, for administering the day to day affairs of the mosque without any threat, intimidation or hindrance from the respondents 3 to 5 and their henchmen. ii)issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction to the 1st respondent to provide adequate and effective police protection for the life of the believers to offer daily prayers and friday prayer in nasrathul islam sangham juma masjid, anappara, without any threat, intimidation or hindrance from the respondents 3 to 5 and their henchmen. iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction tot he 1st respondent to consider ext.p1 complaint and take appropriate action against respondents 3 to 5 in accordance with law.2. respondents 3 to 5 have appeared through the counsel and filed a counter affidavit. their stand is that, the petitioner is not the properly elected secretary of the administrative committee and the election itself is illegal. but, the counsel for the respondents 3 to 5 would further contend that they are not causing any disturbances to the functioning of the mosque and they are not interfering with the prayers in the mosque or any other affairs of the mosque. according to them, they also go to the mosque only for prayers, which cannot be prevented by anybody insofar they are also w.p.(c) no.15961 o”3. members of the mahal. it is also the submission of the respondents 3 to 5 that, there is no law and order situation warranting interference by the police.3. we have heard the learned government pleader also.4. a mosque is believed to be the abode of the almighty. therefore, a serene atmosphere should prevail in the masjid at all times. the dispute between rival factions of the mahal for control of the administration of the mosque cannot disturb that serene atmosphere of the mosque. if they have any dispute regarding the election or other matters, it is for them to approach the appropriate court or before the authorities under the wakf act, if the same is applicable. but, it is in the interest of the members of the mahal to see that the members are able to offer prayers to the almighty in the mosque peacefully, without disturbances from anybody. in the above circumstances, the undertaking of respondents 3 to 5 that, they are not and they will not make any disturbances to the smooth functioning of the mosque is recorded. but, they will also be permitted to offer prayers w.p.(c) no.15961 o”4. peacefully in the mosque. if respondents 3 to 5 or anybody claiming under them cause any disturbance in the mosque and the same is reported to the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent shall take immediate steps to see that, the disturbances are avoided, if necessary, by using force. we make it abundantly clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the rival claims between the petitioner on the one side and the respondents 3 to 5 on the other regarding the election to the administrative committee of the mosque. the writ petition is disposed as above s.siri jagan, judge k.ramakrishnan, judge jm/
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2013 1ST SRAVANA, 1935 WP(C).No. 15961 of 2013 (U) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- V.K. USMAN, SECRETARY, NUSRATHUL ISLAM SANGHAM JUMA MASJID ANAPPARA P.O., KARAKODE, EDAKKARA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.P.SAMSUDIN SMT.NIMA JACOB RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAZHIKKADAVU, VAZHIKKADAVU P.O.”

329. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

2. THE SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 67 505.

3. ABDU SAMAD, S/O.MOIDUTTY, POYYAKODI HOUSE, P.O.KARAKKODE, EDAKKARA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT ”

333.

4. KALLINGAL ABDULSALAM, S/O.ISMAIL, P.O.KARAKKODE, EDAKKARA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN ”

333.

5. KARAPPANCHERI SHOUKATH, S/O.MOHAMMED, P.O.KARAKKODE, EDAKKARA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN ”

333. R3-R5 BY ADV. SRI.K.ANAND R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.MOHAMMED SHAH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jm/- WP(C).No. 15961 of 2013 (U) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 08 05/2013 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT (ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION). EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE GENERAL BODY MEETING OF BELIEVERS HELD ON 10.5.2013 EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SIGNED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE MAHAL, GIVEN TO THE CI OF POLIC NILAMBUR. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL --------------------------------------- \\ TRUE COPY \\ PA TO JUDGE jm S.SIRI JAGAN & K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JJ.

------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.15961 of 2013 ================= Dated this the 23rd day of July 2013 JUDGMENT -------------- S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

The petitioner claims to be the General Secretary of the administrative committee of Nusrathul Islam Sangham Juma Masjid, Anappara in Edakkara, Malappuram District. The mosque was established in 1968. The mosque is being administered by a committee elected from the members of the mahal from time to time. The petitioner claims that, in the last election to the administrative committee, the members of the mahal elected the petitioner and others and they have been administering the affairs of the mosque. The petitioner's complaint in this writ petition is that, respondents 3 to 5, who are the rival claimants for the administration of the committee are causing disturbances and obstructions to the smooth functioning of the mosque. According to the petitioner, respondents 3 to 5 are even obstructing the prayers in the mosque. Despite seeking assistance from the police, the police has not obliged the petitioner. It is under the above W.P.(C) No.15961 o”

2. circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction to the 1st respondent to provide adequate and effective police protection for the life of the petitioner, the members of administrative committee of Nasratul Islam Sangham Juma Masjid, Anappara, for administering the day to day affairs of the mosque without any threat, intimidation or hindrance from the respondents 3 to 5 and their henchmen. ii)issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction to the 1st respondent to provide adequate and effective police protection for the life of the believers to offer daily prayers and Friday prayer in Nasrathul Islam Sangham Juma Masjid, Anappara, without any threat, intimidation or hindrance from the respondents 3 to 5 and their henchmen. iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction tot he 1st respondent to consider Ext.P1 complaint and take appropriate action against respondents 3 to 5 in accordance with law.

2. Respondents 3 to 5 have appeared through the counsel and filed a counter affidavit. Their stand is that, the petitioner is not the properly elected Secretary of the administrative committee and the election itself is illegal. But, the counsel for the respondents 3 to 5 would further contend that they are not causing any disturbances to the functioning of the mosque and they are not interfering with the prayers in the mosque or any other affairs of the mosque. According to them, they also go to the mosque only for prayers, which cannot be prevented by anybody insofar they are also W.P.(C) No.15961 o”

3. members of the mahal. It is also the submission of the respondents 3 to 5 that, there is no law and order situation warranting interference by the police.

3. We have heard the learned Government Pleader also.

4. A Mosque is believed to be the abode of the almighty. Therefore, a serene atmosphere should prevail in the masjid at all times. The dispute between rival factions of the mahal for control of the administration of the mosque cannot disturb that serene atmosphere of the mosque. If they have any dispute regarding the election or other matters, it is for them to approach the appropriate court or before the authorities under the Wakf Act, if the same is applicable. But, it is in the interest of the members of the mahal to see that the members are able to offer prayers to the almighty in the mosque peacefully, without disturbances from anybody. In the above circumstances, the undertaking of respondents 3 to 5 that, they are not and they will not make any disturbances to the smooth functioning of the mosque is recorded. But, they will also be permitted to offer prayers W.P.(C) No.15961 o”

4. peacefully in the mosque. If respondents 3 to 5 or anybody claiming under them cause any disturbance in the mosque and the same is reported to the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent shall take immediate steps to see that, the disturbances are avoided, if necessary, by using force. We make it abundantly clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the rival claims between the petitioner on the one side and the respondents 3 to 5 on the other regarding the election to the administrative committee of the mosque. The writ petition is disposed as above S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE jm/