IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2010 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35563 of 2010(U) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- USHA JOHN,KUTHUR HOUSE,HILL GARDENS, KUTTANELLOOR,THRISSUR-14. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.AJITH KUMAR SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI SRI.P.K.NIJOY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,HOME DEPARTMENT , SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN: 695 001. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,OLLUR POLICE STATION,THRISSUR. 680 306. 3. RAJAN GEORGE, CHIRYAN HOUSE, HARITHA NAGBAR, CHEVARAMBALLAM,CALICUT. 673 017. 4. KURIAN GEORGE, CHIRYAN HOUSE, SREENAGAR,KUTTANELLOOR,THRISSUR-680 014. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI T.K. VIPINDAS. ADV. SRI.A.RANJITH NARAYANAN FOR R3-4 SRI.S.K.SAJU FOR R3-4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).NO.35563 OF 2010 U PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 24.11.2010 SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //True Copy// PS to Judge K.M. JOSEPH & M. C. HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO. 35563 OF 2010 U ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 3rd December, 2010. JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief: "Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, direction or order compelling the 2nd respondent to give adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner and her father." 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is the sister of respondents 3 and 4. According to her, she is staying with her 81 year old father in the house. According to petitioner, respondents 3 and 4 are causing threat to WP(C).NO.35563/2010 U 2 the life of the petitioner and her father. According to the learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4, the allegations raised against them are not correct. He would submit that actually, the fourth respondent was looking after his father and the fourth respondent has put his sister in charge for the time being, but she is not looking after the father. He would submit that respondents 3 and 4 have no intention to cause any threat to the life of the petitioner or to their father. We record the said submission and close the Writ Petition and also direct that in case contrary to the submission made on behalf of respondents 3 and 4, the petitioner is forced to complain before the second respondent of any threat to her life or to the life of her father from respondents 3 and 4, the second respondent will look into it and if the complaint is found to be genuine, he will afford protection to the life of the petitioner and her father as against respondents 3 and 4. We make it clear WP(C).NO.35563/2010 U 3 that we have not pronounced on the correctness of the allegations raised by the petitioner against respondents 3 and 4. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.C. HARI RANI, JUDGE kbk. //True Copy// PS to Judge