IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 6TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 15TH BHADRA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 977 of 2010(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.14068/2010 Dated 09/05/2010 .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER: ---------------------------- STANSILAVOS, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, KALLUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, MANGAD P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.THYPARAMBIL THOMAS THOMAS RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. SMT.HARSHITHA ATTALURI, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. VIJAYAN, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. 3. ALEXANDER THANKACHAN, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIKOLLOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. 4. ARUN ANTONY, AGED NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, S/O.ANTONY, BANGLOW HOUSE, NEAR KANDANCHIRA EARAPPANCHAL, MANGAD, KOLLAM (WORKING AS EXCISE GUARD, EXCISE COMPLEX CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM). 5. AJITH ANTONY, AGED NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, S/O.ANTONY, BANGLOW HOUSE, NEAR KANDANCHIRA, EARAPPANCHAL, MANGAD, KOLLAM. Con.Case(C).No. 977 of 2010(S) 6. BINU KURUSINGALMUKKU, AGED NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, S/O.VIMALA, MANGAD, KOLLAM. 7. DHONI, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.ANTONY, MANGAD VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 8. VIJAYAN, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) STATION HOUSE OFFICER/ASST.SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIKOLLOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. R1 TO R3& R8 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.BENNY GERVASIS. THIS CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/09/2010, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 14068 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. ------------------------------------------ Contempt Case (Civil) No. 977 of 2010 AND W.P.(C) No. 14068 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandra Menon, J. The petitioner in this Contempt of Court Case is the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 14068 of 2010. His case is that the interim order passed by this Court directing to grant police protection for the smooth conduct of the marriage of the daughter of the petitioner (held on 10.05.2010) has been paid only scant regards by the contemnors and that they are liable to be proceeded against under the Contempt of Courts Act. 2. It is contended that after the marriage held on 10.05.2010, the son of the petitioner while proceeding to return the vessels was manhandled by the 4th respondent and others. Similar attack was there on the daughter of the petitioner and brother's wife on 15.07.2010, when they were returning from the Church. Even though the matter was taken to the notice of the concerned police officer, on both occasions it was not properly COC No.977 of 2010 and WP(C) No.14068 of 2010 - 2 - acted upon, but for abusing the Court in filthy language. 3. With regard to the averments and allegations raised in the petition, the 3rd respondent has filed an affidavit refuting the same and stating that no such incident as alleged by the petitioner happened in the evening on 10.05.2010. Pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court granting police protection on 4.5.2010, adequate protection was rendered on 10.05.2010 for the smooth conduct of the marriage, which took place without any hindrance from any quarters. It is also pointed out that no complaint was ever preferred before the said respondent on 11.05.2010 as alleged in para 3 of the petition and that even in the complaint preferred before the Superintendent of Police, Kollam on 12.05.2010 no such averment regarding the assault which allegedly took place on 10.05.2010 has been made. It is asserted in para 3 of the said affidavit that the alleged incident of 15.07.2010 is also a cooked up one, just for the purpose of filing this case. 4. The 3rd respondent has further pointed out in paragraph 4 of the affidavit as follows: “It is respectfully submitted that the petitioner himself is COC No.977 of 2010 and WP(C) No.14068 of 2010 - 3 - involved in several criminal cases. Various crimes have been registered against the petitioner in the stations around Kollam area. C.C. No.1029/09 is registered in the respondent's police station for offences under Section 451, 506(ii), 323, 324, 354 and 34 IPC for criminal trespass into the house and assaulting one Sri.Ibrahim Kunju. C.C. No.140/03 is pending trial before JFCM, Kollam against the petitioner and his brother for offences under Section 143, 147, 148, 324, 427 and 149 IPC along with Section 27 of the Arms Act. Crime No.487/09 is registered against the petitioner, his brother and his son-in-law under Sections 341, 294 (b), 323, 324, 308 and 34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Crime No.794/09 of the Kollam East Police Station is registered against the petitioner under Section 427, 294(b) and 326 IPC. The police authorities are also contemplating initiation of Section 107 proceedings under the Cr.P.C against the petitioner and it is in apprehension of the same that the petitioner has chosen to file this contempt court petition with the above allegations.” 5. It is also brought to the notice before this Court that the concerned ASI attached to the police station and shown as the 8th respondent is not a party to the Writ Petition and that the complaint dated 16.07.2010 filed before the Superintendent of Police has been forwarded to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kollam for enquiry. 6. The fact remains that the direction given by this Court as per the interim order dated 04.50.2010 has been COC No.977 of 2010 and WP(C) No.14068 of 2010 - 4 - substantially complied with and the marriage has been conducted smoothly. There is no allegation that the marriage was intercepted in any manner or that the petitioner was mulcted with any adverse consequences. If the petitioner is aggrieved of any of the alleged acts of the respondents 4 to 7, the remedy lies elsewhere. No contumacious act has been made out on the part of the concerned respondents. There is no merit in the Contempt of Court Case and the same is dismissed accordingly. The prayer sought for in the writ petition, having been substantially satisfied, by virtue of the interim order dated 04.05.2010, nothing remains to be considered in the writ petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge ttb