IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2008 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 31103 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- JIJI VALSAN, AGED 32 YEARS, W/O. VALSAN T.K., KATTUNGAL HOUSE, OMPATHINGAL, MATTATHUR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA 680 692. BY ADV. SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, S.P. OFFICE, THRISSUR -3. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHALAKUDY POLICE STATION, CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VELLIKULANGARA POLICE STATION, VELLIKULANGARA, THRISSUR. 4. VALSAN T.K., S/O. KUMARAN, THEKKINIYEDATH HOUSE, NOW RESIDING AT KUTTUNGAL HOUSE, OMPATHINGAL, MATTATHUR P.O., THRISSUR 680 695. BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SHRI BENJAMIN PAUL FOR R1 TO R3 ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.31103/08 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 18.10.08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE VOTERS CARD OF THE PETITIONER DATED 19.4.04. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE INDIAN PASSPORT DATED 10.1.2008 OF THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXTS: EXT.R4(a): TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAB REPORT. EXT.R4(b): TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITION DATED 20.10.08 SUBMITTED BY THE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR ALONG WITH RECEIPT. TRUE COPY K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.31103 OF 2008 C ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 3rd DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner is the wife of the 4th respondent. She was residing in her house along with the two children born out of the wedlock. The 4th respondent was in the gulf. It was the petitioner, who raised funds for sending him abroad. For that, she is indebted to others to the tune of Rs.1.5 lakhs. When the 4th respondent was in the gulf, he sent only Rs.13,000/- during the last 18 months of foreign employment. He returned on 13.10.2008. When the petitioner pointed out the debt incurred by her, she was brutally manhandled by the 4th respondent and was confined in a room. Somehow or other she was able to escape. Thereafter, she filed Exhibit P1 representation before the police for protection. Alleging that the police did not take any action, this Writ Petition is filed, seeking a direction to the Police Officers to take all steps to save and protect her life from the cruelty and physical harm which the 4th respondent and his men are likely to inflict. W.P.(C)No.31103/08 -2- 2. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that the police did not receive Exhibit P1 petition and they are not aware of the place where the petitioner is presently residing. The police have received a petition from the mother of the petitioner that she is missing. 3. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that, when he was away, the petitioner developed intimacy with one Mr.Biju Joseph. As evident from Exhibit R3(a) Laboratory Report dated 10.10.2008, she is pregnant. The report relates to Mrs.Jiji. According to him, the petitioner eloped with her lover and she is hiding herself. There is no threat to her life from the part of the 4th respondent, it is submitted. 4. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit stating that Exhibit R1(a) does not relate to her and the mother has filed the complaint about her alleged missing as pressurised by the 4th respondent. 5. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and counter allegations, we feel that this is not fit case for this Court to invoke its discretionary jurisdiction. Further, since the police have not received any representation and they are not aware, where the petitioner is residing, they cannot be blamed of having failed in their duty to W.P.(C)No.31103/08 -3- protect the petitioner. So, no direction can be issued to the police, in this case. The petitioner has remedies under other statutes, which she can invoke to redress her grievances. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner and her right to move other forums for appropriate reliefs. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn