IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 1ST NOVEMBER 2010 / 10TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33089 of 2010(I) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------------- THANKAMMA JOSE @ ROSSA, W/O.JOSE, AGED 52 YEARS, KALARIKKAL HOUSE, ANAKKUZHI, VAYATTUPARAMBA P.O., VELLAD AMSOM, NADUVIL DESOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.SATHEESH SRI.V.T.MADHAVAN UNNI. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY HOME SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-645001. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALAKODE POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT-670571. 3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KANNUR DISTRICT, KANNUR-670001. 4. KALARIKKAL JOSE @ CHACKO, S/O.KURIAKOSE, AGED 56 YEARS, KALARIKKAL HOUSE, ANAKKUZHI, VAYATTUPARAMBA P.O., VELLAD AMSOM, NADUVIL DESOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT-670141. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.33089 of 2010-I ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the Ist day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. The case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner and 4th respondent are wife and husband respectively. They are living separately. The 4th respondent is a chronic drunkard and a very cruel person. Petitioner and the children were physically attacked by the 4th respondent many times. Petitioner approached the 2nd respondent many times. Police have registered a case under Section 498A of IPC. Petitioner obtained Ext.P1 interim order in C.M.P No.4065/2010 from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thaliparamba. It is stated that even thereafter the 4th respondent is not permitting the petitioner to live. So the petitioner has given complaint to the 3rd respondent against the 4th respondent by registered post. There is inaction. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Petitioner has already approached the Magistrate Court under the Protection of WPC 33089/2010 -2- Women from Domestic Violence Act and obtained Ext.P1 order. By that order the learned Magistrate has restrained the 4th respondent from committing any act of waste and mischief in petition scheduled property and from causing any obstruction to the peaceful residence of the petitioner. We feel that, it is open to the petitioner to move the Magistrate Court seeking protection against the 4th respondent for the alleged acts against her as the Magistrate has ordered against any obstruction by the 4th respondent to the peaceful residence of the petitioner. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach the Magistrate Court and to seek appropriate orders, the writ petition is disposed of. We, however, make it clear that, if the petitioner complains of commission of any cognizable offence before the official respondents, the official respondents shall take action in accordance with law on the same. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE. MS