IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2011 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 7544 of 2011(P) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SUJATHA, W/O.THAMBIRAJ, PANAYARAKUNNATH HOUSE, KARAVARAM P.O., KALLAMBALAM. BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALLAMBALAM POLICE STATION-695 605. 2. VIJI, W/O.VIJAYAN, KEDARAM, KARAVAROM P.O., KALLAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 605. 3. VIJAYAN, KEDARAM, KARAVAROM P.O., KALLAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 605. 4. RAJINI, D/O.KAMALAMMA, DO. DO. PIN-695 605. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. CHARISMA R2 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.7544/2011 P APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE. P2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.7544 of 2011-P ***************************** Dated this the 25th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. Petitioner, a woman, has come to this Court raising the grievance that police are guilty of inaction and are not taking necessary action against respondents 2 to 4, who are allegedly guilty of culpable conduct against the person of the petitioner and her husband. 2. According to the petitioner, she has purchased an item of property and is residing in the said property along with her husband. Respondents 2 to 4 are neighbours. They had an eye on the property. But the petitioner was successful in purchasing the same. Because of this strain in the relationship, respondents 2 to 4 are continuously vexing and harassing the petitioner. Though complaints have been made, no proper action is seen taken by the 1st respondent, the Sub Inspector of the local police station. In these circumstances, the petitioner claims protection. 3. Respondents 2 to 4, though served, have not chosen to enter appearance. W.P(C) No.7544 of 2011-P 2 4. In these circumstances, we turned to the learned Government Pleader for submissions. The learned Government Pleader submits that it is evident that there are disputes between the petitioner and her husband on the one hand and respondents 2 to 4 on the other. The petitioner is not able to get along well with his neighbours. Allegations and counter allegations are made between the parties. The 2nd respondent, a woman, has raised several complaints against the petitioner and her husband. A crime has been registered. In the perception of the 1st respondent, there is no threat to the life or person of the petitioner. These allegations are raised in the Writ Petition only apprehending further action on the basis of complaints of the 2nd respondent, submits the learned Government Pleader. 5. The learned Government Pleader on behalf of the 1st respondent undertakes that the police shall take necessary action against the petitioner or respondents 2 to 4 if there be any allegations of culpable conduct raised against them. No directions under Article 226 of the Constitution are, in these circumstances, necessary, submits the learned Government Pleader. W.P(C) No.7544 of 2011-P 3 6. We have considered all the relevant inputs. We accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader. Accepting submissions of the learned Government Pleader that necessary action shall be taken if there be any threat against the life or person of the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/