Judgment : The management of CnF Automobile India (P) Ltd,, Oragadam, Mathur seeks direction for providing police protection to its factory premises, officials and employees. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there are ample provisions in the Cr.P.C to accord the protection sought for. Only a minimum relief, namely, in case of law and order problem arises, the protection sought for, could be provided. 3. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that there were labour problems in the said factory. The labourers observes 'go slow'. They want to unite themselves and put up their demands in unison to the management. As on date, there is no law and order problem. It is the attempt of the management to disintegrate the labourers so collected by show of police force. 4. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that till date, the workers have not filed any petition or memorandum to Labour Department Officials. 5. I have anxiously considered the rival submissions. Perused the materials on record and the counter filed by the second respondent. 6. As on date, from the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, there is no union in the company. So, we get a cue from the submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the workers want to form a union. It is stated that they are observing 'go slow'-reducing the volume of their work/production. 7. In labour jurisprudence, 'collective bargaining' has become a recognised form of protest. It is an accepted form of protest in the struggle between capital and labour. If a single worker stand alone, he may not succeed. That is why, trade union movement, collective bargaining, healthy negotiations and deliberations at the negotiation table. Any justifiable form of labour agitation to achieve justifiable demands cannot be thwarted or crushed using police force under the garb of enforcing the law. Police cannot be let loose on peaceful demonstrators and persons fighting for their rights in a justifiable manner. 8. The ground reality has been furnished to the Court by the second respondent/Inspector of Police, C-5 Oragadam Police Station. In his counter, he has stated that there is no law and order problem. 9. It is the submission of the management that some problem arose one year ago. Of course, it was contained. But, we cannot presume the same will happen again. 10. In his counter, he has stated that there is no law and order problem. 9. It is the submission of the management that some problem arose one year ago. Of course, it was contained. But, we cannot presume the same will happen again. 10. There must be concrete details that intervention of police is necessary to maintain law and order problem. There is a categorical statement by the Inspector of Police, that there is no untoward incident or tense situation endangering maintenance of law and order in and around the factory premises. In such circumstances, involving police will be counter productive in Labour-Management relation. It is otherwise when there are strong materials presented to police that there is imminent danger to life and property. 11. It is pertinent here to note the averment in the counter of the second respondent that the petitioner had sent its representation dated 25.8.2013 by the post, it was received by the police on 26.8.2013, however, on the same day, petitioner had rushed to this Court and filed this Criminal Original Petition. 12. There cannot be an anticipatory order to police to provide police protection etc. If such an order is issued, more particularly, in the labour field, it will lead to so many unpleasant consequences that itself will lay seed for many more complications. 13. Thus, no valid ground for directing police protection has been established. 14. In the circumstances, this Criminal Original Petition fails and it is dismissed.