IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 30TH OCTOBER 2008 / 8TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 14526 of 2008(D) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ T.P.LEELAMANI, D/O. PADMAVATHY AMMA, THEKKETHAYIL VEETTIL, KANNIMEL CHERRY, KILIKOLLOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT FROM ULLAS (VAYALIL VEEDU) THEKKEVILA CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM DISTRICT, KOLLAM. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIKOLLOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIKOLLOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. 5. REMANI, PRAVEEN NIVAS, VARYAVEEDU, KUREEPUZHA, KAVANADU.P.O., KOLLAM. 6. PRAVEEN, S/O. REMANI PRAVEEN NIVAS,VARYAVEEDU, KUREEPUZHA, KAVANADU.P.O., KOLLAM. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BENJAMIN PAUL FOR R1 TO R4 ADV. SRI.P.SIVARAJ FOR R5 & 6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.14526/2008 D APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM IN C.S.NO.378/03 DTD. 29/11/2003. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE PETITION BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 05/05/08. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT: EXT.R5(A): COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 20/06/2008 SUBMITTED BY ME BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(C)NO. 14526 OF 2008 ============================ DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2008 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair,J. The petitioner has approached this Court alleging that respondents 5 and 6, who are mother and son, are threatening the petitioner and her two daughters. So she prays for police protection. 2. The petitioner submits, her husband was working in the gulf and nothing is heard of him for the last 13 years. While so, respondents 5 and 6 came to her claiming that her missing husband owes some amount to them. Since the petitioner did not pay the amount, they came to the petitioner's house along with a few supporters and threatened to kill her and her children. Thereupon, she filed O.S.No.378/2003 before the Munsiff's Court, Kollam against the 5th respondent, her husband and others seeking an injunction restraining them from trespassing into the WPC.14526/2008 -2- residential building of the petitioner or threatening the petitioner and her family members. The said suit was decreed as per Ext.P1. The petitioner submits, thereafter she shifted her residence and in the new residence also, the supporters of respondents 5 and 6 are coming and threatening the petitioner and her children. Therefore, she filed Ext.P2 representation before the Director General of Police pointing out her grievances and seeking necessary protection. She submits, copy of that representation was sent to respondents 2 to 4 also. But, no action was taken by the official respondents to protect them. The threatening and harassment by respondents 5 and 6 are continuing unabated. Hence, this writ petition seeking necessary protection to her life and that of her daughters. 3. Respondents 5 and 6 have filed a counter affidavit denying all the allegations against them. They submit, the petitioner's husband owes Rs. 6 lakhs to them. The petitioner's sister-in-law agreed to pay the amount due to them. On receiving the loan amount, the petitioner permitted them to reside along with her in her residential building. The sister-in-law WPC.14526/2008 -3- agreed to pay the amount in monthly instalments of Rs.25,000/-. On paying the first instalment of Rs.25,000/-, respondents 5 and 6 vacated from the residential building of the petitioner. But, thereafter, no payment was made. In fact, the petitioner, her husband and her sister-in-law cheated them. Therefore, they have moved the Magistrate by filing Ext.R5(a) which was forwarded to the police and a crime has been registered against the petitioner and others. 4. We heard the learned Government Pleader for the official respondents also. The learned Government Pleader submitted that there is no law and order problem warranting interference by the police. Only an isolated incident involving the party respondents happened and thereafter there was no threatening or harassment. The learned Government Pleader further submitted that the police have not received Ext.P2 representation or its copy. 5. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit dealing with the averments in the counter affidavit of respondents 5 and 6. WPC.14526/2008 -4- Having regard to the nature of the allegations and counter allegations, we feel that this is not a fit case where this Court should order police protection to the petitioner. She may invoke the ordinary remedies available to her under the Code of Criminal procedure and the Code of Civil Procedure. 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 ks. WPC.14526/2008 -5-