IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2010 / 20TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 14640 of 2010(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- CHINAR ABRAHAM, RESIDING AT KANA THOMA HOSTEL, ROOM NO.34, VELLAPALLYI LANE, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.PREMCHAND RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VANITHA CELL, KOTTAYAM. 3. ANNIE CHANDY, E2, JEWEL SYMPHONY, KANJIKUZHI, KOTTAYAM. G.P. SHRI T K VIPINDAS FOR R1 & R2. ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 14640 of 2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 30.3.2010 OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CMP NO. 882/2010 DATED 31.3.2010 PASSED BY CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL // TRUE COPY// K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 14640 of 2010 D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction of order directing respondents 1 and 2 not to harass the petitioner i any manner. ii) issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent not to interfere with the peaceful living of the petitioner at Kana Thoma working Women's Hostel, Kottayam. 2. Briefly the case of the petitioner is as follows. The petitioner is a second year LL.B. student. There is strain in the W.P.(C).No. 14640 of 2010 2 relationship between the petitioner and her mother, who is the third respondent. The petitioner is residing in a hostel and attending her classes. The third respondent filed a complaint before the Inspector General of Police, who directed the first respondent to enquire the matter. Now respondents 1 ad 2 are harassing the petitioner. 3. According to the third respondent, the mother of the petitioner, she apprehends that the petitioner may be trapped by a person, with whom she has relationship. 4. The matter was referred for mediation. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that before the Mediator the petitioner submitted that she is having a friendship with a person and having no other relationship. She submits that the police is coming to the hostel and harassing her. 5. This Writ Petition is disposed of as follows. Respondents 1 ad 2 shall not harass the petitioner in connection with the complaint filed by the third respondent regarding the alleged relationship with W.P.(C).No. 14640 of 2010 3 some person mentioned in the writ petition. But we also make it clear that this will not stand in the way of the complaint lodged by the third respondent being investigated in accordance with law. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm