IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL FRIDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 30033 of 2011(D) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- 1. NOORJAHAN, AGED 29 YEARS, W/O.SUBAIR, RESIDING AT BLAKKATTUMOLATH HOUSE, ERAMALLUR KARA AND VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691. 2. SUBAIR, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL KADAR RESIDING AT BLAKKATTUMOLATH HOUSE, ERAMALLUR KARA AND VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691. BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALUVA RURAL PINCODE-683 101. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, KOTHAMANGALAM ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691. 4. MOIDU @ MYDEEN, AGED 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHETTUKUDIYIL HOUSE, POOVATHUR P.O., ERAMALLUR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691. 5. ALI @ PUPPA ALI, RESIDING AT CHAKKUMCHIRA VEETTIL, NEAR POOVATHUR MOSQUE, ERMALLUR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691. 6. AZIZ @ NUTER AZIZ, NEAR POOVATHUR MOSQUE, ERAMALLUR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: AV WPC.NO.30033/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS : EXHIBIT P1 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 22/10/2011 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 : COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 22/10/2011 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A TO JUDGE AV PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K. HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No. 30033 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 11th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. This is a strange case where the petitioners (wife and husband) seek police protection against the alleged threats and contumacious acts or violence from the part of respondents 4 to 6. The 4th respondent is none other than the father of the first petitioner. Respondents 5 and 6 are described as notorious goondas of the locality. What is alleged in the writ petition is that the first petitioner fell in love with the second petitioner while the second petitioner was a driver of the 4th respondent. The love ultimately culminated in marriage. It is alleged that ever since the marriage, the 4th respondent has been perpetrating so many illegalities making life miserable for the petitioners. 2. Even though appealing averments have been made in WPC.No.30033/2011. 2 the writ petition and the learned counsel for the petitioners made appealing submissions before us, we are not very much impressed as we are told that the marriage between the petitioners took place some 10 years' ago and out of that wed lock as many as four children have been born. We do not propose to examine the correctness of the averments in the writ petition. We find that Ext.P1 petition has been submitted by the petitioners before the first respondent. 3. As directed by us, Sri.Dhanesh Mathew Majooran learned Government Pleader has taken notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and we have heard him also. We dispose of this writ petition at this stage itself granting the following limited relief to the petitioners; The first respondent will immediately take up Ext.P1. Enquiry will be conducted into Ext.P1 either by the first respondent personally or through any subordinate officers in whom the first respondent has confidence. As part of the enquiry, the officer conducting the enquiry can summon the respondents 4 to 6 if necessary. If the enquiry reveals that there is truth in what is alleged by the petitioners in Ext.P1, it WPC.No.30033/2011. 3 shall be the obligation of the respondents 1 to 3 to take requisite steps for protecting the lives and limbs of the petitioners and their children from any danger on account of respondents 4 to 6. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K. HARILAL, JUDGE. dpk