IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2008 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15229 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SUMI MARY THOMAS , DOOR NO. VII/508 B, PLOT NO. 96 MAVELIPURAM COLONY, THRIKKAKARA. BY ADV. SRI.BENOY K.KADAVAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THRIKKAKARA. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KALAMASSERY. 3. SOJAN THOMAS, S/O. K.T. THOMAS, DOOR NO. VII/508 B, PLOT NO. 96,MAVELIPURAM COLONY THRIKKARA. 4. K.T.THOMAS, DOOR NO. VII/508 B, PLOT NO. 96,MAVELIPURAM COLONY THRIKKARA. 5. ELIAMMA VARGHESE, W/O. K.T.THOMAS DOOR NO. VII/508 B, PLOT NO. 96,MAVELIPURAM COLONY THRIKKARA. BY GOVT.PLEADER SHRI BENJAMIN PAUL FOR R1 TO R3 ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER JOSEPH FOR R4 & R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.15229/08 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY ISSUED BY SUNRISE HOSPITAL, KAKKANAD. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF O.P.No.651 FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF PETITION BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, ALUVA. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.No.3129/08 FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-I, ALUVA. RESPONDENT'S EXTS: EXT.R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.6339/80 DATED 23.12.80. EXT.R3(b): TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION ORDER DATED 20.5.08 IN I.A.No 3129/08 OF THE DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM. TRUE COPY K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.15229 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF JUNE, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner is the wife of the 3rd respondent. Respondents 4 and 5 are her father-in-law and mother-in-law. This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to grant adequate protection to the life of the petitioner in the background of the alleged threat to her from the part of respondents 3 to 5. 2. The petitioner was residing along with the 3rd respondent and his parents in Mavelipuram Colony. The 3rd respondent's parents were instigating the said respondent to break his marriage with her. At their instigation, on 2.5.2008 at about 9.30 PM in the night, the 3rd respondent attempted to stab the petitioner. She suffered injury on her left hand. She was pushed down by him and thereby sustained injury on her forehead also. When she cried, the 3rd respondent left the house. Respondents 4 and 5 were residing separately from November, W.P.(C)No.15229/08 -2- 2006 onwards and therefore the petitioner and the 3rd respondent alone were residing there. The petitioner's father came to her residence and she was admitted in the Sunrise Hospital at Kakkanad. Exhibit P1 is the wound certificate issued by the hospital authorities. Later on, on 18.5.2008 respondents 3 to 5 along with some muscle men came to the house and knocked at the door. After the incident on 2.5.2008, the petitioner's mother was also residing with her. As the petitioner was not able to manage her affairs, the mother was nursing and assisting her. The party respondents along with the muscle men broke open the door and threatened them. Though the petitioner filed a complaint about the above incident before the Sub Inspector of Police, Thrikkakara, no action was taken. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Exhibit P6 representation before the police seeking protection to her life. The petitioner has also moved the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Aluva by filing Exhibit P5 application under the Domestic Violence Act. Since the police did not take any effective action, this writ petition was filed seeking the following relief: “This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue:- A writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing respondents 1 and 2 to grant W.P.(C)No.15229/08 -3- adequate protection to the life of the petitioners as against respondents 3 to 5 and their men”. 3. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations against him and his wife. He submits that he has already moved the civil court and obtained an injunction against the petitioner, her husband and her father from entering into his house and residing there. The building and the land at Mavelipuram belongs to him, which he purchased from the Greater Cochin Development Authority. According to the 4th respondent, his elder son, the husband of the petitioner wants to get the above said house. Therefore they together are playing a drama. The 4th respondent has also submitted that the allegation that her life is under threat from him and his wife is unfounded. He points out that the 3rd respondent is a qualified practising Dentist. The petitioner is a post graduate in Hospital Management and she has worked in some reputed hospitals in Ernakulam. So, the 4th respondent prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit dealing with the averments in the counter affidavit. She also produced Exhibit P9 order passed by the learned Magistrate under the provisions of the Domestic W.P.(C)No.15229/08 -4- Violence Act, as per which the party respondents have been restrained from evicting her from the aforementioned residential building. 4. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and counter allegations, we feel that the police have no role to play in this matrimonial dispute. If there is any threat to the life of the petitioner, she may inform the first respondent and if her allegation is found correct, the said respondent shall take appropriate action. This order will not affect the orders of the civil court or the order passed by the learned Magistrate under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act. The said courts can proceed with the respective proceedings uninfluenced by this direction. The writ petition is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn