IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2010 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35519 of 2010(L) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- SHINY, D/O.MUHAMMAD BABA, AGED 28 YEARS RESIDING AT SHINY MANZIL, NETTAYAM, KACHANI PO THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH P.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE POLICE, SUPERINTENDENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN- 695 001 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PEROORKADA POLICE STATION, PEROORKADA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN- 695 006. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE PEROORKADA POLICE STATION, PEROORKADA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN- 695 006. 4. SHAJAHAN, S/O. K.M.JALAL, TC 10/1450. (1) J.S.MANZIL, VINYANIKKONAM, VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001. 5. RAFEEK, S/O. RAHMATH NISHA, T.C.10/1450 (1) DO..DO.. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.M.CHARISHMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts K.M.JOSEPH & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(C) NO. 35519 OF 2010 ============================ Dated this the 7th day of December 2010 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. The petitioner has approached this court seeking the following reliefs. “i)issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate and effective police protection to the life and properties of the petitioner from the hands of the 4th respondent with immediate effect. ii)issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take immediate actions on the complaints submitted by the petitioner and to proceed against the 4th and 5th respondent in accordance with law. Iii)issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing Wpc 35519/2010 2 the respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate and effective police protection for the smooth conduct of the petitioner's business without any hindrances and obstructions from the respondents 4 and 5 and their henchmen”. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows. Petitioner is a destitute lady and wife of the 4th respondent. The marital relationship between the petitioner and 4th respondent became strained. There are two children. Petitioner and the children were thrown out of the house by 4th respondent. Since then 4th respondent is neither maintaining the petitioner nor the two minor daughters, petitioner and the two minor daughters are living separately. Fourth and fifth respondents along with their henchmen are making efforts to take over forceful possession of a readymade garment shop run by the petitioner. The petitioner has obtained Ext.P3 injunction against them. Despite Ext.P3, respondents 4 and 5 along with their henchmen threatened the petitioner that if she continues the business on the strength of Ext.P3 order, not only her life but also the life of the minor daughters will be in danger and the entire shop will be demolished. The petitioner has now closed down her shop. She Wpc 35519/2010 3 and her children are virtually in starvation. Petitioner filed Ext.P4 complaint and due to inaction, she is before this court. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. Though served, there is no representation for the 4th and 5th respondents. 4. The learned Government Pleader would submit that there is a dispute regarding the possession of the building and conduct of business. Fourth respondent has called to the police station and he has agreed to act in confirmity with the order of injunction and at present there is no threat to the petitioner. Writ petition is disposed of by making the interim order dated 26th November 2010 absolute. K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE lgk